HL Deb 02 February 1982 vol 426 cc1197-8
Lord Boyd-Carpenter

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 whether it is the practice to continue to pay index-linked pensions to former members of the Foreign or other public service who have admitted to acts of treachery and disloyalty but who have not been prosecuted.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Baroness Young)

My Lords, as the law stands, Civil Service and other public service pensions can be forfeited only if a person is convicted of treason, of serious offences under the Official Secrets Acts or of offences in connection with their employment which a Minister has certified to have been gravely injurious to the state or to be liable to lead to serious loss of confidence in the public service.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that Answer, may I ask her whether an index-linked pension, which protects the recipient from the effects of inflation, is not regarded as a proper acknowledgement of faithful service, and is it not a little repulsive that people who on their own admission have betrayed their trust and let down their country should be receiving it?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I utterly condemn the activities of those who are involved with acts of treachery. I do not think it would be right to invite Parliament to alter the law to enable pension rights to be exchanged for immunity from prosecution, and to allow forfeiture to be imposed without prosecution and conviction in the courts would be to raise another issue.

Baroness Fisher of Rednal

My Lords, would the noble Baroness agree that practices of the kind outlined in the Question cause great concern when we measure them against the campaign which is still being waged to make outstanding payments to prisoners of war?

Baroness Young

My Lords, I think that is another question.

Lord Shinwell

My Lords, I understand that the noble Baroness the Leader of the House has just said that she agrees with the present situation—that those who have not been convicted of treachery but are suspected of it, or may be accused of treachery, are entitled to pensions provided by the taxpayers of this country. Is that her position? Because if it is I want to say that I wholly disagree with her.

Baroness Young

My Lords, to reiterate what I said originally, where there is a conviction in a case involving treachery or the Official Secrets Acts a pension right can be forfeited. But we are talking about cases where there is not a conviction, and as the Act stands the pension rights cannot be forfeited under those circumstances.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, while accepting the noble Leader's statement of the law, on the merits of the matter is not the position of someone who has confessed fully to treachery, but who for some reason or other has not been prosecuted, morally exactly the same as that of the person who has been successfully prosecuted?

Baroness Young

My Lords, my noble friend no doubt has some specific case in mind, and if we have some specific case to consider I think one must give the facts which relate to that case. In answer to the Question which has been asked, I can only state the position as it stands under the law.

Back to