§ 29. Mr. Nicholas WintertonTo ask the Attorney-General what recent discussions the Crown prosecution service has had with the obscene publications squad of the Metropolitan police on its prosecutions policy in relation to the Obscene Publications Act 1959 and related legislation.
§ The Attorney-General (Sir Nicholas Lyell)The obscene publications squad of the Metropolitan police works closely with the Crown prosecution service. They have discussed many specific cases in recent months.
§ Mr. WintertonI am grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend for that response. He was one of the 300 Members of Parliament who attended the recent exhibition in the Palace at which the vile and offensive material was displayed for all to see. My right hon. and learned Friend has implied that the Crown prosecution service is unlikely to be successful in prosecuting those who make that material available. Will he agree with me and, I think, with the House that at present our law is wholly inadequate? It is a charter for such offensive material. Will he take steps to amend the law as soon as possible to prevent this vile, offensive and disgraceful material from being made available?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI recognise my hon. Friend's frustration in respect of one or two categories of this material, especially computer-created child pornography. However, he will not overlook the fact that, for example, in 1991, the latest year for which I have figures, the Metropolitan police seized no fewer than 19,000 items and brought cases on 363 occasions under the Obscene Publications Act 1959, 40 occasions under the Protection of Children Act 1978 and 53 occasions under the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
§ Mr. FraserThe Attorney-General may know that I also went to the exhibition organised by the hon. Member for Congleton (Mrs. Winterton). Although I take a fairly relaxed view about many of these matters, I was shocked by the use of new technology, of satellite broadcasting and of computer design to create a new, high-tech and obnoxious market in exploitation, especially of children and women. Much of that material is in the public domain; it is not for private consumption. I know that this is not the direct responsibility of the Attorney-General, but I wonder whether his advice to the Home Secretary will be that the law on these matters needs to be brought up to date in accordance with technology. There is clearly a deficiency in the powers to arrest people found in possession of doc-rnents and pictures in relation to the distribution of child pornography.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI well understand the hon. Gentleman's points and I will refer them to the Home Secretary. The computerised matters with which he dealt are under close scrutiny.