HC Deb 26 November 1986 vol 106 c243W
Mr. Dalyell

asked the Prime Minister what is the estimated cost to public funds of Her Majesty's Government's case against Peter Wright in Australia which cannot be recovered regardless of the outcome of the judgment.

The Prime Minister

It is not possible at this stage to estimate the cost to public funds of Her Majesty's Government's case against Peter Wright in Australia which could not be recovered regardless of the outcome of the judgment.

Mr. Sedgemore

asked the Prime Minister if she will refer the matter of conversations between the Attorney-General, the right hon. and learned Member for Wimbledon (Sir M. Havers) and Mr. Chapman Pincher on 1 January 1983 on security issues to the Security Commission; and if she will make a statement.

The Prime Minister

No. I have no reason to believe that the conversations referred to raise any matters of concern to the Security Commission.

Mr. Sedgemore

asked the Prime Minister (1) if she will issue notes of guidance to Ministers drawing their attention to the inadvisability of discussing matters of security at social functions; and if she will make a statement;

(2) if she will issue notes of guidance to Ministers drawing their attention to the advisability of discussing security matters only on a need-to-know basis; and if she will make a statement.

The Prime Minister

No. Steps are already taken to draw Ministers' attention to these matters.

Mr. Winnick

asked the Prime Minister what factors led to the decision to send Sir Robert Armstrong as Her Majesty's Government's principal witness in the Wright case in Australia; and if she will make a statement.

The Prime Minister

Sir Robert Armstrong is my principal official adviser in relation to matters of security. He accordingly swore the affidavits which form a significant part of the evidence relevant to the case and has appeared as the Government's principal witness in the proceedings.

Forward to