§ 3.4 p.m.
§ Lord McNallyasked Her Majesty's Government:
When they intend to publish the outcome of their criminal memoirs review.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Bassam of Brighton)My Lords, the review has now completed its work and the report is due to be submitted to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary shortly. Publication of the outcome of the review is likely to follow in the very near future.
§ Lord McNallyMy Lords, I welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box for what I hope will be a long and distinguished ministerial career.
I am sorry that this issue remains in the long grass where the Attorney-General left it. Perhaps the Minister will react to some other criminal memoirs that have been doing the rounds. Is he aware that it is now a matter of public record that when they should have been running the country, the previous Conservative administration were indulging in what is described as a madhouse of chicanery, double dealing and leaking? In addition, they spent last week walking with dinosaurs. Is not it now clear that for our democracy to function we need a proper, public-spirited, effective Opposition and that the Liberal Democrats will now provide it?
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for kindly welcoming me to the Dispatch Box. I shall endeavour to make my stay here as long and as distinguished as I possibly can.
As to criminal memoirs—or political memoirs that might be considered criminal—it is not for me to comment. It would be presumptuous for such a new Minister to comment on the relevant merits of the Opposition parties in the House.
Viscount AstorMy Lords, I welcome the Minister to the Dispatch Box. Does he agree that the supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord McNally, had nothing to do with the Question on the Order Paper? For that he should be congratulated because, as usual, the Liberal Democrats have irrelevant policies.
As to the matter in hand, does the Minister agree that in principle no convicted criminal should benefit financially while in prison or on parole? Can he say whether the Prison Service has reviewed the standing orders on these matters, which his predecessor said would be carried out in July? Can the Minister say whether that matter is part of the Home Office review?
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, I am grateful for the question. It would be wrong of me to pre-empt the publication of the review which, as I said, is due in the very near future. As to prison standing orders, I am advised that they are constantly kept under review; that they effectively deal with the problem of memoirs 8 published or attempted to be published by prisoners; and that they are regularly drawn to the attention of those who seek to abuse and to get round them. We believe they continue to be effective in most cases. They are designed to protect the public. It is that matter upon which we should focus our minds and which should be paramount in our thoughts. We do not want to see the publication of criminal memoirs which lead to criminals profiting from their ill-gotten gains.
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, I agree. It is for that reason that the Government have taken a very hostile view of the publication of criminal memoirs.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that it is completely and utterly shameful that criminal thugs—Biggs, for example—should profit from their crimes? Is not it also shameful that the national press and publishers lionise and fête such people on the one hand and, on the other—I refer particularly to the national press—criticise the Government and the Home Secretary for not dealing with crime in a proper way?
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, I am sure that we all agree that it is right that we should have a free press. However, a free press comes with a price: it should offer restraint and reason in reporting the views of those who are convicted. I join my noble friend in condemning the publication or attempted publication of outrageous memoirs. The Government—and, I am sure, all Members of the House—will continue to adopt a very hostile attitude towards such publications.
§ Lord DesaiMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that, no matter what we may think of criminals and profiteering, we must not restrict freedom of speech and expression?
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, I am at one with the noble Lord's comments about freedom of speech. We, as a democracy, must value a free press. It is an important part of our democratic constitution and the way in which government works best. The press and the media generally should reflect on that when they seek to publish outrageous memoirs which can cause only offence, abuse, ill-feeling and unhappiness to those who may be victims of crime.
§ Lord McNallyMy Lords, is not the truth that it is impossible to draft the law to match the indignation? Will we not have to rely on either the sense of good taste and decency of newspaper proprietors and editors—not a very hopeful thought—or on a much-strengthened press complaints code of conduct? Would it not be better for Ministers, having spent so 9 many months trying to devise a law on this matter, to return to the Press Complaints Commission and require it to beef up its regulations?
§ Lord Bassam of BrightonMy Lords, we should give the Press Complaints Commission some credit for the important work that it has undertaken. The noble Lord, Lord Wakeham, met my noble and learned friend Lord Williams to discuss the issues which the noble Lord has quite properly just raised in his question. We should always keep under review the way in which such bodies operate. I believe that they do an important job. Although it may be difficult to draft the legislation that the noble Lord is evidently seeking, I think it is important that in public life we play our part in setting standards. We should inform and advise people that such criminal memoirs should not be published in the way in which many seek; namely, to get around the law and to profit from it.