§ 2.46 p.m.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, while fully recognising the splendid services rendered by the police in dealing with awkward situations such as those arising at "pop" festivals and football matches, they will state who pays the police for attendance at these events and what the extra charges have amounted to during the most appropriate recent period.
§ THE MINISTER OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICH)My Lords, when police are deployed on private property at the request of the owners, for example in football grounds, a charge is made; otherwise the costs of policing special events including "pop" festivals are met from police funds. I regret that no general estimate of the additional cost is available.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, may I ask Her Majesty's Government to consider whether those who enjoy these amenities and games and 774 festivals—and I would say even processions and protests—ought themselves to pay for their pleasure, especially since the Government are short of money which is needed for the needy?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, the noble Lord's supplementary question goes a little wider than his original Question. I would certainly have to consider very carefully before accepting the principle that the right to demonstrate should be hedged in with qualifications that people should donate a sum of money to the Home Office or the local police authority. However, the central principle involved in the noble Lord's Question is that when the police are deployed on private property the owners of the property have to bear the cost. That is essentially the principle which underlies the present attitude in this matter.
§ LORD FRASER OF LONSDALEMy Lords, do not the consequential effects of interference—I will not call it trouble—with the taxpayer and the nation bear upon all of us, and why should those people not pay for their fun?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHNo, my Lords; I do not accept what the noble Lord has just said. The right to demonstrate has been honoured by Governments of different political Parties for many years past. No proposition of the kind the noble Lord has just advanced has been accepted by Governments of either Party, and I very much hope it will not be.
§ LORD BLYTONMy Lords, will the Minister say whether the philosophy embodied in this Question applied to farmers demonstrating in Holyhead last week?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, I think the noble Lord who asked the original Question would be in a better position to answer that than I would.
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, when police are hurt on private property, who pays for their injuries?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, a policeman who is injured on public duty receives compensation in exactly the same way as he would if he were injured in some other circumstances. 775 But if there is a point involved in this specific aspect which the noble Lord has raised of which I am not aware, I will write to him.
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, is this the normal practice? Where is the borderline? If the police are paid separately for functioning on private property, should not those people who pay them bear some part of the cost for policemen who are injured, particularly those who are permanently injured?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, every Saturday a very large number of police officers go to football matches, where the football clubs normally pay for the policing inside the ground. I am not aware of any particular rule covering what happens when a policeman is injured in those circumstances. My assumption would be that the normal rules would apply, but if there is anything in particular which applies in this case, I will write to the noble Lord.
§ LORD KINNAIRDMy Lords, could not the cost to the police of attending these often rather unattractive meetings be added to the price of the tickets?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, that is presumably the position at the moment. When football clubs arrange with the local chief constable to provide a certain number of policemen for which they have to pay, obviously the spectator pays for that police protection through the admission charges.
§ LORD CASTLEMy Lords, are we to understand from the noble Lord's Answer to the noble Lord, Lord Fraser of Lonsdale, that he dissociates himself from the principle that the costs involved in the provocative processions of the National Front in this city should be a charge to the public?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, I think that my attitude on the matter is quite straightforward. When demonstrations take place the police will make appropriate arrangements whatever the political philosophy of the people organising the demonstration.
VISCOUNT ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, I wonder whether the noble Lord would 776 be a little clearer and more specific. He says that where police are called to private property the owner of the private property should pay the charge. This clearly applies in some cases, but obviously it cannot be applied when police are called to remove a burglar. Can he be a little clearer as to where this line is to be drawn?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, I stated earlier the general principle, but, of course, if police are called to private premises or private property because an offence is taking place, in that case obviously the police do not impose a charge.
§ LORD DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, for the purpose of "pop" festivals, is Windsor Great Park public or private property?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, on the specific matter of the precise circumstances at Windsor—which I rather assumed might have been raised even earlier than the noble Lord has raised it—I understand that the cost of the police action fell on the local police fund, because the Crown Estates Commissioners had not contracted for a police presence and the police themselves decided to take action.
§ LORD PEDDIEMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend what is the recognised charge for police accommodation for private purposes, and whether or not there has been any change in the charges which have been made over the past few years?
§ LORD HARRIS OF GREENWICHMy Lords, as the noble Lord will not be altogether surprised to learn, I cannot give him a detailed answer to the question which he asked because it is rather wider than the Question on the Order Paper. I shall find out the answer and let him know.