§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will now take action to ensure that, when Members of Parliament and the general public write to him, they are not kept waiting for periods between four to six weeks for replies which contain information and details which are readily available for despatch within 48 hours of receipt by his Department of the original communication.
§ Mr. CarlisleI do not accept the implication in the last part of the hon. Member's Question. Members of the Home Office are well aware of the need to deal with correspondence with the least possible delay.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why it took his Department until 7th January, 1972, to reply to correspondence dated 7th October, 1971, from the hon. Member for West Ham, North on matters for which he is responsible; and whether he will expedite replies in the future.
§ Mr. SharplesThe letter conveyed serious allegations against the police. They were carefully investigated, and the Director of Public Prosecutions was consulted, before the Commissioner decided that no action should be taken against any of the constables concerned. There was no undue delay.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why, in view of the fact that the information contained in his reply to the letter dated 22nd November, 1971, from Mr. H. L. Hopkinson of John McLauchlan was readily available, he did not reply until 21st December, 1971; and why it took him until 7th January, 1972, to send a copy of this communication to the hon. Member for West Ham, North; and what information as contained in this communication was not available on or before 1st December, 1971.
§ Mr. CarlisleMr. Hopkinson's letter did not seek for information, but was a polemical statement of opinion. The hon. Member was informed on 21st December, in answer to a previous Question, that a reply had been sent to his constituent. I do not consider that there was any496W unreasonable delay in sending him a copy.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he replied to the communication dated 2nd December, 1971, from the hon. Member for West Ham, North, concerning matters raised by Mr. Loughlan regarding the Horserace Totalisator and Betting Levy Boards Bill; and what information, as contained in this reply, was not available by 18th December, 1971.
§ Mr. CarlisleOn 25th January. It was not a question of information; the correspondence raised issues of policy.