§ 9. Mr. Skinnerasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received about police photographers being present at working-class demonstrations; and whether all films have been destroyed when protests have been made by members of the public involved.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsSince March 1974 I have received representations about the presence of police photographers at five demonstrations. No photographs were taken at two of these demonstrations; a further film was taken solely for police training purposes; the photographs taken at the other two demonstrations were destroyed.
§ Mr. SkinnerDoes my right hon. Friend agree that we have reached a sorry state—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—when police photographers are sent to a little place called Bletchley, where about 50 women were marching on May Day about cuts in public expenditure? Is he entirely happy about the retention of film used outside Downing Street when decent Brazilian citizens, along with British people, were demonstrating against President Geisel? Does he not realise that the retention of that film might mean that those protesting against that oppressive regime could be marked for life if they dared to return to Brazil?
Why continue this silly practice? Why does my right hon. Friend prevent the police from using much-needed money for other purposes by sending them all round the country to photograph Left-wing people who are demonstrating but never bother to take films of demonstrations such as the one mounted by the National Front at Rotherham on Saturday?
§ Mr. JenkinsIf my hon. Friend will consider the matter calmly, as I know he mostly does—[Interruption.] The increase in the number of complaints received has been very small over the past two years. I agree that the police should exercise restraint in these matters, and that it can be foolish to take such photographs in certain circumstances, but I have no 1800 indication of any abuse. Let me assure my hon. Friend that as regards the Brazilian demonstration there was no question of the film passing outside the control of the Metropolitan Police. [Interruption.] The Metropolitan Police have the right to take a film and to use it for training purposes. I have no statutory power, even if I thought it wise, which I do not, to say that the police—[Interruption.] I have no statutory power, even if I thought it wise, which I do not, to say that the police alone among people in this country should never be allowed to take photographs.
§ Mr. HordernAs these working-class demonstrations are entirely peaceable, as the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) has frequently said, what possible objection can there be to the police taking such photographs for training purposes?
§ Mr. JenkinsI have indicated my attitude fairly clearly. I do not necessarily think it would be a good thing if every time a little demonstration were held a great battery of police cameramen attended it, or even one police cameraman. There is a question of balance and sense. I hope that broadly speaking the police will observe that balance. I am not going to put on a special ban—indeed, I have no power to do so—but I think that the police should exercise restraint in this as in other matters.
§ Mr. ClemitsonFor what purpose other than training are photographs taken?
§ Mr. JenkinsIn certain circumstances photographs could well be important to ascertain what had happened in a situation in which public order was threatened or damaged. I do not think one could possibly object to photographs being available of the Red Lion Square demonstration, for instance. They might be of value in court proceedings. I cannot take the view that such photographs should automatically not exist or should be destroyed.