HL Deb 28 April 1977 vol 382 cc690-2

3.16 p.m.

The Earl of KIMBERLEY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government why Sinn Fein were allowed to organise a collection in Hammersmith in conjunction with a trade union committee on 27th March for raising funds to help finance a "campaign of harassment" against police stations in Britain.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, we understand that at a public meeting held by the Trade Union Committee Against the Prevention of Terrorism Act a collection was made to provide funds for that organisation. If there were any evidence that the money was collected or used for an illegal purpose the police would take appropriate action.

The Earl of KIMI3ERLEY

My Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that Answer, may I ask whether he can say how it will be possible ever to prove this, although that fact was stated? Are not flying pickets illegal in this country, and is it not almost a subversive activity against the police to hold meetings of this sort?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, this particular meeting was perfectly all right. For example, Sinn Fein is not a proscribed organisation in Great Britain nor, for that matter, is it proscribed in Northern Ireland. But to come to the point made by the noble Earl about the funds, fund raising for terrorism connected with Northern Ireland is punishable under Section 10 of the 1976 Act—where funds raised are intended for terrorism. In fact four people have been charged under that section: one was acquitted, and three were convicted and sentenced to 10 years, eight years and two years' imprisonment respectively.

Viscount ST. DAVIDS

My Lords, is the noble Lord quite right in saying that there cannot be any accusation or charge unless it is proved that this fund was used for that purpose? If the fund was stated to be used for the purpose and not used for it, surely it was collected for one purpose and used for another, and that also would be actionable?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, if I may say so with great respect, so far as the Question is concerned we are dealing with the subject of monies collected for the purposes of terrorism, and it was to that Question that I tried to address myself.

Lord INGLEWOOD

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether his original Answer indicated that the information in the possession of the noble Lord was different from his information and that in fact this money was not collected to help finance a campaign of terrorism? If so, will he make it clear? On the other hand, if he has doubts about whether it was or was not, will he also make that clear?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, what I said to your Lordships, and I cannot add to it, was that if there were any evidence that the money was collected or used for an illegal purpose the police would then take appropriate action. So far as this particular meeting was concerned it was perfectly all right for a collection to be taken. My information is that the meeting was held at the Hammersmith Town Hall and it was perfectly proper for them to take a collection. It is the purpose for which the money is collected and used that matters, and if that comes under the appropriate Act it is then for the police to take action.

Lord CLIFFORD of CHUDLEIGH

My Lords, is it not a fact that the funds were actually collected for the "Troops Out" campaign, and is that not just another way of putting the funds in a certain direction?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, ' I have no information as to the specific purpose of the fund. What I am saying is that if money is raised for illegal purposes which come under the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1976, action can be taken, and I think I satisfied your Lordships that in the past action has in fact been taken.