HC Deb 13 July 1983 vol 45 cc876-7
45. Mr. Willie W. Hamilton

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland what was the total cost to public funds of the recent trial of the Fife area health board laboratory employees; and if he will make a statement.

The Solicitor-General for Scotland

The information is not available. However, I can say that the trial itself took three full days of court time and that the appeal hearing took up one full day of debate. In addition to that, the case called on another four occasions to deal with incidental procedure. The only identifiable public cost is that of witness expenses, which amounted to £59.62.

Mr. Hamilton

What good has come of this sorry state of affairs? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman confirm that as a result of it all sit-ins and work-ins are now liable to criminal proceedings? Now that the case is over in the courts, will he initiate a public inquiry to see how the thing started in the first place?

The Solicitor-General for Scotland

I shall not, and it would not be for me to do so. Important legal issues have to be decided, and these were determined by the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh, following the appeal. As the hon. Gentleman knows, once those legal issues had been resolved, my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate decided that no further action should be taken.

Mr. Henderson

Does my hon. and learned Friend feel that it is regrettable that many otherwise sensible and reasonable people should have got into this position in the first place? Does it not stem from the essential legal responsibility of Fife health board to ensure that there is a clearly qualified medical responsibility for determining patients' health, and lives as well?

The Solicitor-General for Scotland

Any detailed comment by me on the workings of Fife health board would be inappropriate. However, it was part of my noble and learned Friend the Lord Advocate's decision that great importance was to be attached to the work of the laboratory in Fife. For that reason, among others, he determined that this matter should not be sent back to the sheriff.

Mr. Ewing

Was the Solicitor-General happy about the Secretary of State's decision to instruct .Fife health board, when the appeal in this matter was pending, to impose conditions on those appellants — [Interruption.] The Solicitor-General should not take advice from the Under-Secretary responsible for health. He will just mislead the Solicitor-General. Was the Solicitor-General happy about the Secretary of State's intervention when the appeal was pending, because many people felt that the Secretary of State had intervened at the time of the strike in a further effort to save the political skin of his hon. Friend the Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Henderson)?

The Solicitor-General for Scotland

I can only reiterate that matters concerning Fife health board are no concern of mine unless prosecutions arise out of what appear to be incidents of criminal conduct. A prosecution was mounted, and following that there was an appeal to the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh. The matter has now been resolved, together with the legal issues.