§ 12. Mr. DalyellTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what consideration he is giving to charges following the raid by special branch on Queen Margaret drive, Glasgow, in relation to the Zircon film.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonConsideration of criminal charges was, of course, a matter for the Lord Advocate, not my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State. As I informed the hon. Gentleman in the House on 9 December 1987, the then Lord Advocate announced on 27 November 1987 that no criminal proceedings would be instituted in Scotland.
§ Mr. DalyellOn Tuesday 27 January 1987, what indications were available to the Secretary of State personally that special branch might visit Queen Margaret drive?
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThe short answer is none. The Secretary of State became aware that there was likely to be a police operation at the BBC's premises when, quite coincidentally, he visited them with the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) on the evening of Friday 30 January to participate in the recording of a BBC Scotland television programme. That was after the decision had been made and warrants issued by the sheriff court in Scotland. There are no grounds for the allegation that the Government were involved in that decision.
§ Mr. GallowayBBC Scotland's headquarters are in my constituency. Brian Barr, who was witch-hunted as a result of that raid, is one of my most distinguished constituents. The incredible gymnastics of the Minister's answer, supplemented by a brief quickly whispered to him by the Secretary of State, do not disguise the simple question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell). Did the Secretary of State for Scotland know on 30 January that there was to be a police raid on BBC Scotland? Yes or no? The truth please.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI made it quite clear that the decision was made when the warrant was submitted to the court. My right hon. and learned Friend was informally informed of the decision that evening by a police officer at the BBC Scotland premises. He was not consulted about the decision before it was made and was not in any way involved in it. The decision was the responsibility of the Law Officers and the procurator fiscal.
§ Mr. Bill WalkerDoes my hon. Friend agree that there was nothing unusual about this incident? The police entered the premises to look for evidence, having obtained a warrant from a sheriff. That is not an unusual occurrence. The next question is whether the evidence found is sufficient to bring charges. That is how the police and courts normally operate.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThe Lord Advocate was certain that the proper procedures for obtaining the search warrant were followed, and that the involvement of the procurator fiscal and the sheriff was in accordance with 292 the established law in Scotland. On 27 November the Lord Advocate announced that, having considered reports from the fiscal, having consulted the Attorney-General and having regard to the public interest, he had issued instructions not to institute criminal proceedings in respect of any disclosure.
§ Mr. GallowayApologise then.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThere is no need for me to apologise. The police were investigating a potentially serious criminal offence. The fact that, at the end of the day, no criminal proceedings were instituted, does not mean that the police action was wrong.