§ 4. Mr. Cryerasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next expects to meet the chairman of the Police Complaints Board.
§ Mr. WhitelawI have no present plans for a further meeting with Lord Plowden.
§ Mr. CryerDoes the Home Secretary accept that there is considerable dissatisfaction with the current police complaints 1480 procedure? Does he accept that the police force is a publicly accountable force and that there ought to be an independent element of investigation into police complaints? That has been considerably reinforced by the recent deaths of Blair Peach and Jimmy Kelly. Many hon. Members are concerned to ensure that the police maintain and improve their reputation. Surely one of the ways to do this would be to have an independent investigation into police complaints rather than have the police investigating them.
§ Mr. WhitelawI am sure that the hon. Gentleman will remember that the previous Government, supported by myself and many others, believed that it was right to set up an independent element of inquiry into the police through the Police Complaints Board. I believe that the board is independent. I only wish that the House would accept that it is. This House set up the Police Complaints Board as an independent element of inquiry. Now that it has been set up, for some reason which I do not understand certain hon. Members will not accept that what they set up as independent is independent. The hon. Gentleman mentioned two specific cases. I am sure that he will appreciate that they are both the subject of inquiries and possible investigations by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Therefore, it would be quite improper for me to add anything in respect of either of them.
§ Mr. AitkenIs my right hon. Friend aware that on the whole the Police Complaints Board has a reputation for carrying out its powers thoroughly and fairly? Of course, it has no power to investigate complaints that involve criminal, or possible criminal, prosecutions. Is my right hon. Friend also aware that one of the defects in the existing system is that the board is not complainant-activated, and as a result must trawl through a vast mass of complaints which are trivial and vexatious and were never really intended to come before the Board at all?
§ Mr. WhitelawI am grateful to my hon. Friend. There is a lot of truth in what he has said. The board is due to make a report on the first years of its activities next year. We can then all investigate to see whether further improvement ought to be made in its procedures.
§ Mr. MeacherDoes the Home Secretary accept that the present police complaints procedure is not a satisfactory means of investigating the deaths of no fewer than 60 persons who have died in police custody over the last nine years from non-natural causes excluding suicide? Does he accept that the evidence of so many cases of violent injury and death while in police custody—not only Jimmy Kelly and the others who have been mentioned—is now on such a scale as to require a public inquiry if confidence in the police is to be restored?
§ Mr. WhitelawI could not conceivably accept what the hon. Gentleman has said. I have no intention of doing so without looking into the facts, and that I am perfectly prepared to do. Equally, I should add that the House set up the Police Complaints Board and we shall have an opportunity to look at its activities over the period since it was set up. Surely we ought to do so. But to go on arguing that it is not independent, when we set it up as independent, and to suggest that it cannot do the job when we set it up to do the job, is an extraordinary way for the House to proceed.
§ Mr. EmeryWill my right hon. Friend take note that the only complaints against the present police complaints procedure come from the extreme Left of the Labour Party?
§ Mr. WhitelawIt is not for me to say from where the complaints come, but I do notice. I have a good eye for what is going on.
§ Mr. Kilroy-SilkDoes the Home Secretary accept that there is considerable public concern and disquiet into the policing of Knowsley by the K Division, not just because of the death of Jimmy Kelly after being in police custody, but also because of the injuries sustained by a constituent of mine, Michael Canavagh, who lost a spleen and a kidney after being in police custody? There are many similar cases of serious allegations. Would not these be dissipated by an independent public inquiry, not least so that the reputation of the police, and the public's confidence in it, can be restored? This concern will not be allayed by an investigation carried out by internal means.
§ Mr. WhitelawI can only say to the hon. Gentleman that over the years evidence 1482 of what has happened at the public inquiries has never been as satisfactory as he hoped it would. In many cases, public inquiries have not led to the results that many people hoped they would—
§ Mr. Russell KerrNor have police inquiries.
§ Mr. WhitelawWhere there is any lapse of duty on the part of any police officer, it is very important that that should be pursued through the courts and the criminal procedures. It is very important indeed that the police live within the law. I entirely agree with what the hon. Gentleman says. An inquiry is going on into some of the cases that he raised. That inquiry is an internal one but is being carried out by a police officer from another force—that is important—and the result will go to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It will, therefore, then be outside the police itself. Here again, I think that we should wait to see how that procedure works.
§ Mr. FarrIs my right hon. Friend aware that while the Police Complaints Board is a good body to have set up, in many cases where one refers a case to the board it seems to rely for its decision purely upon evidence provided by the police? A number of people feel that the present set-up should be changed and improved to allow more of an independent assessment?
§ Mr. WhitelawI am grateful to my hon. Friend. That is exactly the opportunity that the House will have when the board makes its report on the first years of its operations. We shall then have to look at it very seriously and consider whether we have got it right.
§ Mr. George CunninghamWith regard to the Blair Peach case, which has been mentioned in these exchanges, I recognise that the Secretary of State will want to wait for the outcome of the inquest, but will he keep his mind open about the desirability, perhaps, of a public inquiry at the end of that inquest, as much in the interests of the police as of those who are complaining against the police?
§ Mr. WhitelawI appreciate what the hon. Gentleman says. I am very strongly advised by lawyers, and when I am advised by lawyers I believe it to be right to take their advice. I have not always 1483 been so loyal to lawyers, but in this case It would seem to be an ideal solution to it would be quite wrong of me to make any comment.