§ Mr. Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how long was the last request by Gurpal Virdi for postponement of the Metropolitan Police discipline hearing; how long the postponement was; and whose availability caused the extra delay. [100031]
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeThe Metropolitan Police Commissioner tells me that solicitors representing Sergeant Virdi sought an adjournment of the Metropolitan Police discipline hearing on or around 31 August 1999. The adjournment was sought to allow expert witnesses, acting for the defence, sufficient time to examine the evidence in the case.
110WBoth parties have agreed the hearing should now start on 7 February 2000.
§ Mr. Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will authorise Gurpal Virdi to meet the police inspectorate before the resolution of the outstanding employment and discipline hearings involving the Metropolitan Police Service; [100029]
(2) if he will authorise the police inspectorate to meet Gurpal Virdi before the resolution of the outstanding employment and discipline hearings involving the Metropolitan Police Service. [100028]
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeWhether Sergeant Virdi meets a member of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) is a matter for them. I understand that HMIC, in order to avoid any suggestion of compromising proceedings, would not expect to meet a police officer engaged in disciplinary and employment tribunal proceedings until those proceedings, and any related appeals, were complete.
§ Mr. Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Metropolitan Police Service first received notice of the employment claim by Gurpal Virdi; and what the reasons have been for the delay in the tribunal hearing. [100030]
§ Mr. Charles ClarkeThe Metropolitan Police Commissioner tells me that the originating application for the employment tribunal in Sergeant Gurpal Virdi's case was presented on 28 June 1998. The Metropolitan Police Service served notice of its intention to contest the matter.
The tribunal was made aware that there are outstanding disciplinary matters relating to Sergeant Virdi, which are linked to the employment claim. As evidence that will be used both by the defence and the prosecution in the disciplinary hearing will also be used at the employment tribunal, the tribunal cannot proceed until the disciplinary hearing is concluded.
The employment tribunal has been made aware of the mutually agreed revised date to commence the disciplinary hearing on 7 February 2000. The employment tribunal has set the date of 5 May 2000 for a directions hearing with the full hearing due to commence on 14 June 2000.