§ 31. Mr. Clinton Davisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases in magistrates' courts, during the past 12 months, have children appeared as witnesses of character in cases concerning their parents.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Mark Carlisle)I regret that this information is not available.
§ Mr. DavisIs the hon. and learned Gentleman aware that on 15th March at Staines Magistrates' Court a 12-year-old boy was brought into open court by the direction of the chairman of the bench, Mr. John Slagg, J.P., to witness the shame of his mother who was facing that court on a charge. Is he further aware that the chairman asked the boy:
Do you know why your mother is here today?Is this not a grotesque misuse of judicial discretion, and is this not a case deserving of inquiry?
§ Mr. CarlisleI am aware of the case on 15th March. The behaviour of individual magistrates is a matter for the Lord Chancellor, but in view of what the hon. Gentleman has said it is only right that I should say that I do not necessarily accept that the purpose of doing this was that the boy should witness the shame of his mother. I understand there is considerable dispute whether any questions were put to the child.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesI congratulate the hon. and learned Gentleman, and also my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Leicester, North-West (Mr. Greville Janner), on having become "learned". In view of the statement that has been made by my hon. Friend which the hon. and learned Gentleman has disputed, and the fact which has been elicited by my hon. Friend, would it not be for the satisfaction and the good name of the magistrate that there should be a statement of what happened so that we can judge the matter?
§ Mr. CarlisleI do not think that there is any case for a statement. The conduct of a court in any matter is a question for the justices concerned. The chairman of the justices apparently considered that, in the interests of justice, he would like to see the child of this woman, who was present at court, before deciding what it was appropriate to do with regard to his mother. What I said was apparently in dispute is the question which the hon. Gentleman said was reported in the Press as having been put to the boy. I have seen a report which suggested that this question was not put in the way the Press implied. I do not think it is right to suggest that the magistrate did this with the intention of shaming anybody.
§ Mr. Greville JannerWill the learned Minister be good enough to give instructions through the means open to him—never mind the facts of this case—that in future children will not be heard in open court in matters of this kind and that the magistrates, in the exercise of their discretion, will, if they think it will help them, see such children in private and not expose them to the unhappiness which this case has obviously brought about?
§ Mr. CarlisleI am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman and thank him and his hon. Friend for the kind remarks which they have made about me. That is a valuable suggestion. It must be within the hands of the magistrates to decide whether they wish to see a person in open court or in private, and it is not a matter upon which I can comment as a Minister.