Westminster Council: District Auditor's Report (Hansard, 1 February 1994)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (The Earl of Arran)
My Lords, this is a matter for the council, its auditor and its electors, not for the Government. It would be wrong to comment on any particular case until the legal processes are complete. If the allegations are proved to be true the Government will unreservedly condemn the actions of the councillors responsible.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, that is the form of reply I expected and I suppose I must be grateful. Is the Minister aware, however, that on 1st July 1991 I asked a specific Question of the Minister at the Dispatch Box about whether what Westminster City Council was doing at that time in its housing policy was in accord with government policy? The following phrases were used by the Minister in her answer: those proposals appear to be sensible and they do not conflict with government policy … that can only be a good thing and an imaginative way of addressing the problem … the Question attacks a very good scheme which addresses a difficult problem for West minster".—[0fficial Report, 1/7/91; col. 770.] I suggest to the Minister that it is now a little too late to say that the matter has nothing to do with the Government. More than once attention has been drawn to it by Members of your Lordships' House other than myself—

Noble Lords
Question !

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
Does the Minister not agree that according to answers given at that time the Government were involved and knew what Westminster City Council was doing? If there was no collusion, there was certainly agreement that it could carry on with what it was doing.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I can say to the noble Lord that, to the very best of my knowledge, the Government were not aware that this was happening. Indeed, it came to the notice of the Government in 1991 through press reports.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the District Auditor published these very serious charges against a number of councillors 1184 before he had given them any opportunity to reply? Is not that wholly contrary to natural justice and does it riot indicate that the District Auditor is unfitted to his post?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, no, it does not suggest that the District Auditor is unfitted to his post. He knows exactly what he is doing. What he is allowed to do is laid down perfectly well by statute. It is in the 1982 Act. That statute has passed through both. Houses of Parliament.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords, in the light of the Answer given to the noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, will the Government now retract statements that have been made about other councils which have got up to various shenanigans down the years about which the Government have not been afraid to comment'?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am slightly disappointed that the noble Lord brings party politics into the situation—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ The Earl of Arran
This is a set of very grave and serious allegations. They should be totally independent of any form of party politics.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, is it not absolutely deplorable that before persons charged with serious offences have had the opportunity of making their defence, which they are entitled to do, attempts should be made in this House to prejudge the issue? Where is our sense of natural justice? Where is our sense of common decency? Where is our sense of British fair play?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, my noble and learned friend is absolutely right. It is important that the Government are seen to be completely independent and completely impartial.

§ Baroness Gould of Potternewton
My Lords, as someone who has been responsible for following through two district auditors' reports, may I ask the Minister whether he really believes that there is any chance of Mr. John Magill changing his provisional views? Appreciating, from experience, that he is not likely to make claims that he cannot substantiate, is not the evidence of malpractice therefore conclusive?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am not precisely certain what the noble Baroness is asking. Perhaps she can elaborate at some later date.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, does my noble friend think that in view of the fact—

Noble Lords
Order!

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Wakeham)
My Lords, I think that my noble friend should be allowed to ask his question.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, does my noble friend think that, as this is a matter upon which the courts will be asked to adjudicate, both Parliament and parliamentarians should, in the circumstances, show a 1185 little reticence instead of trying to muddy the waters which can only result in something less than justice being done?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, my noble friend is right. The courts could be asked to adjudicate. But that is by no means certain. In the meantime, the case is semi-sub judice, so to speak. Perhaps I may make clear that if the case did go to the courts it would of course become sub judice.

§ Lord Williams of Elvel
My Lords, is the Minister aware that a paper entitled Home Ownership Proposals was produced to a meeting of the chairmen's group of the Westminster City Council on 27th January 1987, and the chairmen's group decided to take the proposals forward? Is he further aware that among the proposals contained in the paper was a paragraph which reads: The short term objective must be to target the marginal wards and, as a matter of utmost urgency, redress the imbalance by encouraging a pattern of tenure which is more likely to translate into Conservative votes"? Are not those precisely the proposals that the then Minister approved on 1st July 1991; those that "appear to be sensible" and do not appear to "conflict with government policy"?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am not aware of those remarks made back in 1987. We would do well this afternoon not to go over government policy on homelessness. It is neither the right time nor the right occasion for that. This Question pertains entirely to the situation surrounding Westminster City Council.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords—

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords—

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, the noble Lord from the Liberal Benches, I think.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, further to the question of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, has it always been the Government's policy to refrain from commenting upon alleged misconduct by local authority members until convictions are secured in a court of law?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, when the district auditor is called in, that is the case.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, this is an interim report. To my knowledge, no government have ever commented upon interim reports. I hope that this Government will continue that practice.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, my noble friend is right. That is the machinery laid down in the 1982 Act.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the use in his first Answer of the word "allegations" is incorrect? It was the District Auditor who acted on the basis of certain allegations that had been made. The procedure that he has since followed conforms fully with the Local Government Finance Act, the shortcomings of which were pointed out to the Government by me and others during its passage through this House.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, nevertheless the Bill did go through this House. It went through another place as well. As my right honourable friend the Secretary of State has made clear continually, if he believes that there are things which could be improved upon or matters that could be put right, after the case is over he will examine them.

§ Lord Jenkins of Hillhead
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that a little while ago he appeared to promulgate a doctrine that when there might be legal action pending, an issue was semi- sub judice? He postulates a position in which almost every issue of public discussion would be precluded from being brought before the public. Will he repudiate that rather extraordinary doctrine which some of his more senior noble and noble and learned friends seem to have accepted in a desperate attempt to defend Westminster City Council, in sharp contrast to the position in which councils of a different political persuasion have been arraigned for sins in the past?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the auditor is following procedures laid down by statute and conducted in a quasi-judicial manner. That is how the law stands at the moment. That is how the law will stand unless and until Parliament decides to change it.