HC Deb 17 January 2000 vol 342 cc243-4W
Mr. Mackinlay

To ask the Solicitor-General if he will make a statement on the prospects for criminal prosecutions being started relating to the Paddington rail disaster. [104709]

The Solicitor-General

The British Transport Police are conducting a thorough investigation into the circumstances of the train collision in the vicinity of Ladbroke Grove on Tuesday 5 October 1999. As the police complete aspects of their inquiries, they intend to submit for advice reports, together with supporting evidence, to the Crown Prosecution Service. The prospects for criminal proceedings by the CPS are dependent on evidence derived from the police investigation, and not, for example, from evidence given to the public inquiry to be conducted by Lord Cullen, as that inquiry has an entirely different function. It is plainly not possible to anticipate, nor is it appropriate to speculate on, what evidence will be obtained by the police. When police inquiries conclude, the decision on whether or not to institute criminal proceedings will be made by the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Crown Prosecution Service, in consultation with the Law Officers. I understand that the HSE will also be considering the possibility of bringing a prosecution.

Mrs. Dunwoody

To ask the Solicitor-General if he will make a statement on the decision to offer immunity to railway companies offering evidence to the inquiry into the Ladbroke Grove accident. [104629]

Mr. Mackinlay

To ask the Solicitor-General what recent representations he has received relating to immunity from prosecution for those giving evidence before a tribunal with special reference to the Paddington rail disaster; and if he will make a statement. [104710]

The Solicitor-General

On 29 November 1999 the Attorney-General authorised Lord Cullen to provide potential witnesses to his inquiry with the following undertakingTo undertake in respect of any person who provides evidence to the inquiry that no evidence he or she may give before the inquiry (whether orally or by written statement) nor any written statement made preparatory to giving evidence nor any documents produced by that person to the inquiry will be used in evidence against him or her in any criminal proceedings, except in proceedings where he or she is charged with having given false evidence in the course of this inquiry or having conspired with or procured others to do so".

The purpose of authorising Lord Cullen to provide an undertaking in these terms was to enable him to begin his inquiry immediately, and to ensure that it would be fully effective. It was certain that without such an undertaking being given potential witnesses would be inhibited from providing Lord Cullen with full assistance. The public interest clearly favoured Lord Cullen undertaking his inquiry as soon as possible, and thereafter proceeding quickly, so that lessons can be learned from the circumstances that led to this tragedy. The undertaking is not the same as an immunity from prosecution: it has a much more limited effect.