HC Deb 04 April 1995 vol 257 cc1095-6W
Mr. Bermingham

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the practice of his Department in respect of the classification of documents as company documents; and if the documents referred to in his answer to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) of 21 July 1994,Official Report, column 554, as company documents were the personal copy of a director of board minutes and related documents. [17009]

Mr. Soames

[holding reply 28 March 1995]: I have nothing further to add to my answer to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) on 21 July 1994, Official Report, column 554.

Mr. Byers

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which minister authorised the raid by the Ministry of Defence police on the officers of British Manufacture and Research Company in April 1990; who now has possession of the documents seized; when he expects that the documents; will be returned to the former chairman; and if he will make a statement. [18242]

Mr. Soames

No ministerial approval was either needed or given. The Ministry of Defence police were acting properly within their legal powers to pursue a criminal investigation and it would have been quite improper for Ministers to intervene. The documents seized were returned to the official receivers in June 1993. They were all regarded as company documents and treated as such throughout the Ministry of Defence police investigation.

Dr. Clark

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date his Department took possession of documents taken from the company BMARC; on what date these documents were handed over to the Scott inquiry; and if he will list the Ministers who had access to these documents within his Department. [18300]

Mr. Soames

Documents from Astra/BMARC premises were seized by Ministry of Defence Police on several occasions between March and August 1990. These were not MOD-owned documents and were returned to the receivers of Astra in June 1993. The question of the provision of any of these documents to the Scott inquiry is one for the receivers of the inquiry. No Minister had access to the documents which had been seized by the Ministry of Defence police for the purposes of an investigation into alleged corruption.