§ Mr. Tony Banksasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the answer of 21 November 1985 Official Report, column 272, whether he is now in a position to give the information requested in relation to any of the squads and units referred to; if he expects consultation to be completed and decisions made before the districts are abolished; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Giles Shaw[pursuant to his reply, 20 January 1986, c. 10]: The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells me that the squads and units mentioned 526W are still the subject of consultation and no decisions have yet been taken as to their future roles and organisation. I understand that consultations are likely to have been completed and decisions reached on the special patrol group, the district support units and district crime squads before the abolition of districts. However, the future of district juvenile bureaux (youth and community sections) may not have been decided by that time, and in this event the bureaux will continue to operate as at present (but reporting to area headquarters rather than districts) until their future is determined.
Robbery squads and intelligence and surveillance units operate on an area basis, so decisions on their future will not be affected by the timetable for the abolition of districts.
§ Mr. Tony Banksasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is the practice of the community relations branch of the Metropolitan police to maintain lists of the party political affiliations of London borough councillors.
§ Mr. Giles Shaw[pursuant to his reply, 13 January, c. 459]: The Commissioner informs me that it is not his practice to maintain such lists. Information of this nature was sought on one occasion recently in connection with the commissioner's duty under section 106 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to establish community-police consultative arrangements throughout the Metropolitan police district. I understand that a number of local political parties had represented that his policy of opposing the affiliation of political parties as such to community-police consultative groups was effectively excluding them from the consultative process in areas where, as minority parties, they were not represented among council nominees to the local consultative group. Information about the political affiliation of councillors was requested from borough councils, as a one-off exercise to help in considering these representations. This information is, of course, publicly available. I understand that most councils have already provided it and that none has objected to the request.