Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 159)
TUESDAY 30 JUNE 1998
COUNCILLOR STEPHEN
MURPHY AND
MR DAVID
WILMOT
Mr Winnick
140. It just shows you how Parliamentarians
are determined to try and find out the full position. The decision
to request confidentiality in this case. It is not necessarily
the same practice as other police forces, am I not right?
(Mr Wilmot) I cannot speak about other police forces.
What I can say is that our legal advisers—I will read out
what my solicitor said to me so I can try and answer the Chairman's
question. "We all believe that the `initiative' came from
our side in the sense that it was one of the proposed terms of
the agreement. It has not proved probable to attribute it to any
individual as a specific idea. We all believe that it emerged
from various meetings and discussions which took place with the
interested parties during the final weeks of the case." That
means Taylor's side and the insurers' side as well.
(Councillor Murphy) On all of these, the public interest
was always served at the start of this, when the local press were
publicising the claims that Mr Taylor was actually making. His
initial claim was for a figure of £21 million. That was the
damages claimed which he actually put in. At that time there was
a lot of comment about those claims.
(Mr Wilmot) Alleged by the press.
(Councillor Murphy) It was headlines in the press.
Chairman
141. I think Mr Wilmot said something.
(Mr Wilmot) I said that it was alleged in the press.
142. Alleged, yes, but the £21 million
was a press figure?
(Mr Wilmot) It was alleged in the press.
Chairman: I see now that the figure is much
lower than that actually, although it is substantial.
Mr Corbett: 10.
Chairman
143. So do you think confidentiality has been
worthwhile in the end? Has it had the effect desired?
(Councillor Murphy) You have raised the public image
on it again, have you not, by asking me questions.
144. Yes, but people do ask questions. That
is why we are sent here. Councillors are supposed to ask questions
as well as MPs.
(Councillor Murphy) We always do ask questions. That
is why we were in the position to make the decisions that we made.
145. Good. Mr Wilmot.
(Mr Wilmot) I think it is very similar to the private
part of a police authority meeting. My authority certainly takes
the view—in fact, it is the law—that as many issues
as possible should be in the public part of it. However, there
are very special interest cases which are in the minority, where
you have what we call Part II, which is the private session. I
do think on occasions there are good reasons for confidentiality
clauses being inserted in agreements. The result of the cases
may not be known to the public that an agreement has been made.
I can think in some instances where the plaintiff has asked for
the confidentiality clause and that has probably served their
purpose.
Mr Corbett
146. Can we go back: you have taken over most
of your insurance risks, you tell us, since 1992?
(Mr Wilmot) A substantial part but not all of it.
147. Can you help me, I have never understood
what substantial is. The bigger half, two-thirds, or three-quarters?
(Mr Wilmot) We have an agreement that we will pay
the first £250,000 of any claim. Clearly, motor insurance
is a separate issue again. Then there are other liabilities such
as an employers' liability and occupiers' liability on buildings
which are treated separately, but in terms of litigation we have
now taken more control over the decision making process, as a
result of which we have paid out, we think, considerably less.
148. Can you tell us why you decided to do that.
Was it because you thought you could do this more cheaply or with
more certainty?
(Mr Wilmot) It is part of our management drive with
the authority to manage our affairs more effectively and to make
best use of the limited public resources that we have.
149. Does that not expose you to more risk?
(Mr Wilmot) No, the risk is the same. What you do
is to calculate the risk and decide how best to handle it.
150. This really gets back to the disclosure
point we have been on about. You have got more public money at
stake now, I would have thought, potentially, than under the earlier
arrangement with MMI. I think this reinforces the point—I
do not know whether you would agree with us—that we have
been making about the need to disclose outcomes.
(Mr Wilmot) All of those figures that we have settled
ourselves are available in our accounts because we have paid for
them by public money and they are publicly known.
151. The point is, is it because of the Taylor
case that you cannot get insurance now?
(Councillor Murphy) No, certainly not.
152. It seems strange to me that suddenly you
have changed your past practice.
(Councillor Murphy) Because of the costs of insurance.
We constantly review. It is a yearly process that we have to review
our insurance premiums. We review our insurance costs. We review
our cover. That is done by the Police Authority. That is the accountability
process that we put the Chief Constable under to answer.
153. How much have the premiums gone up because
of the Taylor case?
(Councillor Murphy) We do not have that information
available. I am not aware that premiums have gone up. Premiums
have gone up as a general cost.
154. So you would disagree with my proposition
that public funds are now more at risk because of the Taylor case
than they were before?
(Mr Wilmot) There is a letter to the Committee from
the insurance company that refutes that and says that a one-off
case like Taylor has no effect on premiums whatsoever. In fact,
the reverse.
Mr Howarth
155. It is one factor to be taken into account.
(Mr Wilmot) It does not necessarily follow that premiums
will go up.
Chairman
156. If I have a bump in my car it certainly
does seem to affect my premiums so I cannot really understand
why it should be different for the Greater Manchester Police Force.
(Mr Wilmot) I can only go by what the insurance company
says. As a public body I am charged by my Authority and the Government
to make the best out of what we have. Together we have tried to
manage our insurance policy—in the broader sense of the
word, of course, not specific policies—throughout the force
over the last few years. I have to say it has been very successfully
handled.
Mr Howarth
157. Can I ask Councillor Murphy, first of all,
you mentioned that the maximum cover that MMI gave you was £6
million.
(Councillor Murphy) No, their argument was that we
were only insured to a maximum of six million.
158. Was that for any one individual case or
was that for a whole year?
(Councillor Murphy) That was on this case.
159. That was just on this one case?
(Councillor Murphy) Just on this case.
| 
