§ 32. Mr. Gordon PrenticeWhat discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions in respect of bringing prosecutions for alleged perjury. [17698]
§ The Attorney-GeneralI meet the Director of Public Prosecutions frequently to discuss matters of mutual interest. It is not my practice to disclose the subject matter of our discussions.
§ Mr. PrenticeWhy is it that journalists fromThe Guardian can research, write and publish a book called "The Liar" about the arms dealer and former Conservative Cabinet Minister Jonathan Aitken, but the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis seems congenitally incapable—six months after the trial, which collapsed when Jonathan Aitken withdrew—of getting a report to the Crown Prosecution Service with regard to possible prosecution? What is the problem?
§ The Attorney-GeneralMy hon. Friend has been diligent and has tabled six questions for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. The matters that my hon. Friend raises are being investigated by the police and are entirely a police matter. If the time comes, the police will report to the Director of Public Prosecutions. There is no obvious reason why I should be consulted, and in this case it would be expected that I would not be consulted.
Mr. John M. TaylorCan the Attorney-General seriously expect any improvement in morale in the Crown Prosecution Service until such time as its lawyers are given rights of audience in the higher courts?
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe question is on the subject of perjury, and the hon. Gentleman raises a wider issue.
§ The Attorney-GeneralIf the hon. Gentleman tables a question on rights of audience, I will seek to answer it. Procedures laid down by the previous Administration for consultation on rights of audience, including asking the 486 views of judges, have taken an interminably long time; years and years go by before any determination. I suspect that the hon. Gentleman, as a former Whip, voted for that measure six or seven years ago.