§ Mr. Dellasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what statistical or survey advice he obtained on the likelihood of his letter of 23rd February 1973 to secretaries of certain probation and after-care committees providing him with information, rather than just views, on the extent to which social inquiry reports are obtained in the circumstances recommended by Circulars 188 and 189/1968, and on the obstacles to their wider use;
(2) whether he will send a further letter to the secretaries of certain probation and after-care committees, supplementary to his letter of 23rd February 1973, making clear exactly what information he wishes to have in answer to paragraph 7(v) of his letter of 23rd February, and in what form;
(3) whether he will send a further letter to the secretaries of selected probation and after-care committees, or to other appropriate persons, seeking information retrospectively, or in other suitable ways, on the extent of compliance, and reasons for non-compliance with Circulars 188 and 189/1968 in order to ensure that he has typical information uninfluenced by the prospective investigation proposed in his letter of 23rd February 1973 to secretaries of certain probation and aftercare committees;
(4) Why, in his letter of 23rd February 1973 to secretaries of certain probation and after-care committees, he does not seek information on the total number of cases falling within the scope of Circulars 188 and 189/1968 in order to provide information about the extent to which social inquiry reports are obtained as promised in the answer of the Minister of State, Home Office to the right hon. Member for Birkenhead on 8th February 1973.-[Vol. 850, c. 766];
(5) what information about the usual or past reasons for non-compliance with Circulars 188 and 189/1968 he expects to obtain from the eight-week prospective inquiry proposed in his letter of 23rd February to the secretaries of certain probation and after-care committees, since this letter specifically draws to the attention of the courts concerned the requirements of the circulars and the fact of widespread non-compliance.
28W
§ Mr. CarlisleThe inquiry to which the right hon. Gentleman's Questions relate is not intended to be a statistical survey in controlled conditions; its object is to collect from local sources information relating generally to the functioning of the system of supply of social inquiry reports to magistrates' courts. While 1 accept that in the right hon. Gentleman's view a different kind of investigation would be desirable, I prefer for the present to await the outcome of the inquiry already put in train, and I see no need for a supplementary letter at this stage.
§ Mr. Dellasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (I) whether, in deciding that for the time being he will not make rules under Section 57 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967, he took account of the possibility that a reason for non-compliance with Circulars 188 and 189/1968 may have been ignorance or forgetfulness in the courts as to their existence, or disagreement by the courts with their contents;
(2) why he has not yet made any attempt to discover whether one obstacle to compliance with Circulars 188 and 189/1968 is forgetfulness or ignorance in the courts as to the existence of these circulars, or disagreement by the courts with the recommendations of these circulars; and whether it is now his intention to launch a retrospective investigation into this question which is not covered in his letter of 23rd February 1973.
§ Mr. CarlisleIn reaching his decision my right hon. Friend considered the situation as a whole. The inquiry which is being made gives those consulted a wide opportunity to comment on current practice and the reasons for it; I see no need for a "retrospective investigation".