§ 40. Mr. Woodnuttasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he ordered an investigation at Parkhurst Prison on the basis of alleged evidence supplied by felons to a newspaper; and why he did not require the prisoners concerned to use the normal channels available to them for making complaints.
§ Mr. Elystan MorganMy right hon. Friend decided that immediate inquiry into these very serious complaints was in the public interest and that of the prison service. A first aim of the inquiry is to establish whether there is foundation to any of the allegations.
§ Mr. WoodnuttDoes not the hon. Gentleman think it rather disgraceful that this is the second occasion in the last 12 months when his Department has taken the word of a felon and initiated inquiries without going through the normal processes? We had the occasion last year when Prison Officer Jackson had to stand trial and go through all the mental anguish that that involves, only to be acquitted. Why cannot the Government go through the normal processes, instead of taking notice of what is published in the newspapers?
§ Mr. MorganI am not willing to prejudge this issue in as flagrant a way as the hon. Gentleman has done. I am certain that it is in the best interests of prison officers, and in the general public interest, that allegations as serious as this, to which 120 persons seem to have put their names, should be investigated.
§ Mr. MurrayIs my hon. Friend satisfied that the machinery for complaints within prisons is adequate? It seems wrong that the Home Secretary should take notice of an article in a Sunday newspaper without taking a more careful look at the machinery of complaint.
§ Mr. MorganI think that the machinery is generally adequate. A prisoner's normal channel of complaint about prison treatment is by petition, by seeing the visiting committee, or the board of visitors, or the visiting officer of the Secretary of State. If a prisoner has used one of those means and is not satisfied, it is still open to him to write to his Member of Parliament.
§ Mr. DeedesWhile accepting what the hon. Gentleman said about the matter now under inquiry, may I ask whether he will accept that this sort of device could be used in a way very damaging to the prison service?
§ Mr. MorganI concede that it is open to abuse.
§ Mr. WoodnuttOn a point of order. In view of the very unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.