HL Deb 13 June 1907 vol 175 cc1554-6
LORD NEWTON

My Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government if they can state how much longer the Royal Commission on the Duties of the Metropolitan Police is expected to sit, and whether any facts of importance have been elicited hitherto. I have put this Question on the Paper because I am quite unable myself to understand for what reason this Commission is now sitting. If it was appointed for the purpose of discovering that the police are human beings like everybody else and liable to make mistakes occasionally, it was unnecessary, and it was equally so if the purpose was to demonstrate that the Metropolitan Police are the best body of police in the civilised world. These are facts with which everyone is perfectly familiar. The immediate cause of the appointment of the Commission was a mistake made in the case of a lady of French nationality, and it is hardly credible, but nevertheless true, that this much-maligned person has not appeared before the Commission. Nearly the whole of the time of the Commission has been occupied in listening to tales told them by bookmakers, loafers, and persons whose professions and avocations are perhaps better left undescribed, and it has resolved itself into a vague, fishing kind of inquiry. In view of the terms of the reference to this Commission, which was appointed — To inquire into and report upon the duties of the Metropolitan Police in dealing with eases of drunkenness, disorder, and solicitation in the streets, and the manner in which these duties are discharged, it is perfectly obvious that it may go on indefinitely. At the beginning of the session I inquired privately of my noble friend who represents the Home Office whether the inquiry was shortly coming to an end, and he informed me that he was under the impression that it was about to terminate. I wish now to ask how many days the Commission has sat, how much it has cost up to now, and whether, in the opinion of the Home Office, any single fact of any importance has been elicited in evidence, and whether, in short, the noble Earl considers that anything worth the cost of a single day's sitting has yet been elicited by the Commission? It is a curious fact that, whereas our Metropolitan Police force appears to be the envy of every other nation —and foreigners are never tired of expressing their admiration for the methods by which something like 15,000 men control a population of 6,000,000, including some of the worst ruffians on the face of the earth —we are at the present moment apparently endeavouring to discredit the force by haling them, as if they were criminals, before the Commission in question and putting all sorts of ridiculous questions to them. If an inquiry into the condition of the police force is necessary, it should be conducted in the ordinary way by means of a departmental Committee. A fishing inquiry of this kind can only exercise a demoralising effect on the police. I hope my noble friend will be able to give me an assurance that this long-drawn-out farce is coming to a conclusion.

EARL BEAUCHAMP

My Lords, I am glad to be able to tell the noble Lord that the Royal Commission do not expect that it will be necessary to hold more than a few further sittings for the taking of evidence. They began to sit on 17th July of last year; and they have held fifty-seven sittings for the taking of evidence since that time. I am unable to answer the noble Lord's question as to cost, as that has not yet been accurately ascertained. The Commissioners are of opinion that the inquiry is not one which in the interests of the public should be prolonged for a longer time than is necessary to discharge; the duties imposed upon them; and they propose to present their Report and the bulk of the evidence as soon as the difficult and delicate character of the inquiry will permit. With regard to the expression of opinion invited from me by the noble Lord on the kind of information elicited, he will at once see that it is impossible for anybody who represents the Home Office to express such an opinion at the present time. The inquiry relates to a body of men under the control of the Home Office, and it would be very inadvisable that the Home Office should, before the presentation of the Report, express an opinion on the matter, which is still, so to speak, sub judice.