§ Mr. HainTo ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make available to the members of the Intelligence and Security Services Committee Sir Richard Scott's further recommendation in section K7.7 which has been submitted to the Government but not made publicly available. [16950]
§ Mr. FreemanYes.
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what steps he intends to take in the light of Sir Richard Scott's recommendation in section K8.13 to amend paragraph 27 of "Questions of Procedure for Ministers"; and if he will make a statement. [16948]
§ Mr. FreemanThe Government are considering what further measures may need to be taken in the light of this and other findings of the Scott report and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister will consider in due course whether such measures require amendments to "Questions of Procedure for Ministers".
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusion in section G13.113 and 115 that Ministers should inform the court if they have views on disclosure; and if he will make a statement; [17369]
(2) what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusions in section G18.107 that it is a waste of public time and money to place the issue of disclosure in respect of trivial documents before the trial judge; and if he will make a statement. [17367]
The Deputy Prime MinisterFollowing the House of Lords judgment in ex parte Wiley—1994—Ministers can make voluntary disclosure of documents if they conclude that this is in the overall public interest.
593W
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusion in section G18.66 that the Attorney-General's advice was without any sound legal foundation; and if he will make a statement. [17371]
The Deputy Prime MinisterThe Government are entirely satisfied that the Attorney-General's advice was soundly based in law. A copy of the Government's response to the Scott report on public interest immunity is in the Library of the House.
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the conclusions he reached in page 114 of the oral evidence he gave to Sir Richard Scott on 28 February 1994 relating to disclosure of documents; and what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusions set out in section G of his report relating to this matter. [17366]
The Deputy Prime MinisterThe Attorney-General and prosecuting counsel in the Matrix Churchill case had advised that it was for the trial judge to decide on disclosure of the documents covered by my public interest immunity certificate. The trial judge, Judge Smedley, subsequently ordered disclosure as I had expected him to.
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusion in G13.106 that the brief to Mr. Moses and the Attorney-General's submissions to Judge Smedley were inconsistent with his views as outlined in oral evidence given on 28 February 1994; and if he will make a statement. [17370]
The Deputy Prime MinisterI am satisfied that Judge Smedley dealt with the PII certificate which I signed in precisely the way in which the Attorney-General had advised me he would. Judge Smedley looked at the documents covered by my PII certificate and decided which should be disclosed.
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusion in section G18.104 that the class claims made in the Matrix-Churchill trial; and if he will make a statement. [17368]
The Deputy Prime MinisterThe PII class claims in the Matrix Churchill trial were held by the trial judge to have been properly made. The application of PII class claims in criminal cases has since been confirmed by the higher courts.
§ Mr. HainTo ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of Sir Richard Scott's conclusion in section G18–60 that the Government are entitled to authorise the disclosure of their confidential or secret documents; and if he will make a statement. [17372]
The Deputy Prime MinisterFollowing the House of Lords judgment in ex parte Wiley—1994—Ministers can make voluntary disclosure of documents if they conclude that this is in the overall public interest. It has always been for Ministers to decide whether disclosure for purposes other than legal proceedings is in the public interest.