§ 13. Mr. DalyellTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the implications for his general policy on initiating litigation of the cost of legal action relating to the book "Inside Intelligence".
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThe costs payable by the Government in respect of the legal action relating to the book "Inside Intelligence" have not yet been finally determined. Cost is only one factor to be taken into account in deciding whether to initiate litigation.
§ Mr. DalyellWhat is the latest cost figure?
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonThe total amount to be paid will be ascertained only when accounts have been lodged and taxed by the relevant authorities. So far, the total sums paid by the Government amount to £64,871.
§ Mr. McKelveyIf the Minister is saying that cost is only one aspect of deciding whether a case should proceed, there must be some further examination of what the total cost will be. There must at least be a guesstimate of what the total cost will be.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI have told the hon. Gentleman that the total sums paid so far amount to £64,871, but I stress that the issue in this case is whether a person who has undertaken not to write about his work with the intelligence services should be allowed to break that undertaking. It was, and remains, the Government's view that it is important to raise any court action necessary to prevent such undertakings from being broken.
§ Mr. BuchanDoes the Minister agree that this is the second time that the Government have made complete fools of themselves in the eyes of the world over such cases? Following Peter Wright, we now have the Cavendish case in Scotland. Is not the serious consequence of this that the Government can initiate such action, which 136 costs newspapers much money? For low-level circulation newspapers it is a form of concealed censorship, which should be deplored and withdrawn.
§ Lord James Douglas-HamiltonI cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is the Government's duty to enforce the duty of confidentiality owed by members or former members of the security and intelligence services. The articles in The Scotsman that prompted the action were based on a book written by such a person. The issue is whether a newspaper that had obtained that book was entitled to publish it. I stress that I cannot believe that the House would wish to abolish the duty of confidentiality owed by members of the security and intelligence services.
§ Mr. DalyellOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I hope to raise the matter on the Adjournment.