§ 10. Mr. Skinnerasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many extra police have been allocated duties that include surveillance of Members of Parliament and trade union leaders.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesThe responsibilities of the police do not include such duties; so the question does not arise.
§ Mr. SkinnerWhy is it that during the course of at least a two-year period the police were following Left-wing demon- 650 strators and activists at rallies and other events with a view, so we are told, eventually to take some training films, or whatever? Will my right hon. Friend put an end to the speculation that the withdrawal of certain Special Branch officers from the ports to central London is entirely unconnected with what he has said before? Is it not time that our overstretched police force, as we are so often reminded it is, concentrated its activities on a much narrower front—namely, on investigating the National Front instead of protecting it as it is at present?
§ Mr. SkinnerWell, I think it is.
§ Mr. ReesIn that case, my hon. Friend is wrong yet again. What he says about police protecting the National Front is not true. What he says about the Special Branch is not true. The Special Branch collects information on those whom I think cause problems for the State. However, my hon. Friend asked me about Members of Parliament and trade union leaders being followed. The answer is "No". The conclusion drawn in the article in Private Eye giving the reason for withdrawing Special Branch officers from the ports and letting the police forces concerned undertake that task makes Private Eye even more amusing and wrong than usual.
§ Mr. Anthony GrantWill not the right hon. Gentleman take pity on the obvious disappointment of his hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) that he is not being surveyed? Could he not allocate a retired part-time person to keep an eye on him?
§ Mr. ReesIf that were a judgment that I had to make, a number of people would have to be worried about whom I would allocate.