HC Deb 21 November 1974 vol 881 cc1506-7
9. Mr. Hal Miller

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has given any further consideration to the question of the legal penalties available for the sentencing of those convicted of acts of terrorism or of murder of those in the service of the Crown; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Roy Jenkins

I keep all these matters under review, as I said in answer to a supplementary question by the hon. Gentleman following a Private Notice Question on 8th November.

Mr. Miller

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is a growing demand in the country for a greater measure of protection for people subject to these attacks and for the introduction of a deterrent? Does he also accept that even those of us on this side of the House who are abolitionists by conscience have been reluctantly driven to the conclusion that there is a need for the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Mr. Jenkins

I think that the hon. Gentleman is wrong, although I respect the view that he has put forward. I ask him to read and study carefully the speech made by his right hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Whitelaw) when he moved the abolition of the death penalty in Northern Ireland 15 months ago. The right hon. Gentleman moved in a reverse process from the hon. Gentleman, having been a retentionist, because he had come to the conclusion that to retain the death penalty in Northern Ireland would increase the risk to the security services, the Army, the police and others concerned with public duties.

Mrs. Knight

Has the Secretary of State any comment to make on the legal judgment of my noble Friend Lord Hailsham that the crime of terrorism could, under present law, call for and receive the death penalty?

Mr. Jenkins

I was not aware that the hon. Lady's noble Friend had delivered a legal judgment on this matter. I thought that his opinion was delivered at a Conservative Party Press conference, which is not the normal forum, even for a party which so ostentatiously expresses belief in law and order, for the delivery of legal judgments.