| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
8.51 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Mike O'Brien): The hon. Gentleman has set out in some detail his concerns relating to the case of Bill Sutherland, a retired Metropolitan Police officer. As he will know, I am not the regular spokesperson on the Metropolitan police. That task is ably carried out by the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey). I regret to say that she is in Brussels, at a meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council. However, I am very happy to respond.
The investigation of internal complaints is an operational matter for the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, who has provided me with information about the background to the matter, about the initial inquiry and about the subsequent review in 1995 by Commander Quinn, director of the Metropolitan Police's complaints investigation bureau.
The Commissioner tells me that in July 1988 the then PC William Sutherland made a series of allegations about the management of the Holloway division where he was based, in particular in respect of a Chief Superintendent Newlands, now deceased, and his association with a local business man, Mr. Sam Morris, also now deceased. In all, allegations were made against three serving officers.
As those against whom the allegations were made were of a senior rank, in line with the regulations in force at the time, the then commander of the complaints investigation bureau led the inquiry. As a matter of record, I should remind the hon. Gentleman that in 1988 the Police (Discipline) Regulations 1985 were in force; they have now been superseded by the Police (Conduct) Regulations 1999, although those apply only to complaints made after 1 April 1999.
Because none of the allegations concerned criminal activity, the inquiry was internal and did not require the involvement of officers from an outside force. During the inquiry, which lasted from July 1988 to January 1989, I am told that Mr. Sutherland gave a detailed written statement, and the hon. Gentleman tells me that he was interviewed. A further 18 witnesses were seen, all of whom made written statements to the investigating officer.
The investigation also produced 112 pages of documentary evidence. The records of interview alone amounted to 54 typed pages. I am told that none of the witnesses cited by Mr. Sutherland was able to offer evidence substantiating his allegations. I am also told that the report recommended that no action should be taken against any of the officers named in the allegations.
PC Sutherland was personally advised of the conclusions of the report in February 1989. I know that Mr. Sutherland retired from the Metropolitan police service in l992. Since his retirement, Mr. Sutherland has corresponded regularly with Members of Parliament and with senior officers in the Metropolitan police about his concerns and allegations and about what he considers to be the unsatisfactory internal investigations procedures within the Metropolitan police.
I am aware of the on-going correspondence on this matter. I know that the hon. Gentleman has received replies from both Commander Quinn and, in 1996, from the then Deputy Commissioner stating that a further review had been carried out and they were both satisfied that the correct procedures had been followed.
I understand that Mr. Sutherland also made further allegations--although not directly related to the original inquiry--about what he believed amounted to malicious acts against him. The Commissioner has advised me that a full explanation was offered to Mr. Sutherland rejecting each of the allegations as unsubstantiated. I have raised the inquiry again with the Metropolitan police, who have confirmed that they are content that the procedures followed in the initial inquiry complied fully with the regulations in force at the time, and that they have no reason to doubt the conclusions that were reached. Of course, if the hon. Gentleman or Mr. Sutherland have any material that they believe is new and of a significant nature and they wish to give it to me, I will be happy to pass it to the Commissioner for his consideration.
It is not for me to comment on the allegations themselves. Those matters are properly for the investigating officer to consider. However, we must recognise the importance of ensuring that all police forces--including the Metropolitan police, for which the Home Secretary is the police authority--are properly equipped to deal with allegations of impropriety, as well as other general complaints.
It is, of course, important for the Metropolitan police to satisfy themselves today--in a new climate, to which the hon. Gentleman alluded--about how Mr. Sutherland's claims were investigated. They have reported to me that they are confident that the conclusions of the inquiry report are both fair and accurate. I know, too, that the Metropolitan police take very seriously any allegations of wrongdoing by any of their officers, whether they are made by the general public, fellow officers or by civilians.
I remind the hon. Gentleman that, in his annualpolicing report for 1999-2000, the Commissioner is uncompromising when it comes to integrity:
The Commissioner has publicly expressed his determination to tackle corruption in the Metropolitan police. In recent years, the Metropolitan police have deployed sophisticated methods to investigate corruption and the Metropolitan police's complaints investigation bureau--CIB--created a new branch, CIB3, whose purpose is to investigate allegations of serious corruption.
In December 1998, the Commissioner launched the Met's corruption and dishonesty prevention strategy, which aims to ensure that there is no hiding place for those who are dishonest or unethical. One aspect of this is the "Right Line", a confidential telephone line for any members of staff who wish to report concerns about corrupt, dishonest or unethical behaviour in a confidential and secure way. This is administered by CIB's intelligence cell. It is publicised by a poster campaign and an advertisement in the internal police newspaperThe Job. I welcome the Commissioner's commitment to ridding the Metropolitan police of corruption. I fully support him in those efforts, as I support every other force that is actively seeking to tackle corruption.
I would also like to say a few words about the conduct of internal investigations. It is the Government's policy that internal investigations should be conducted fairly, impartially and thoroughly. Today, detailed procedures exist for internal police investigations that provide safeguards for the thoroughness of the investigation and for officers under investigation.
The procedures are set out in the "Guidance to Chief Officers on Complaints and Discipline" and, from April 1999, in the detailed "Guidance on Police Unsatisfactory Performance, Complaints and Misconduct Procedures". The procedures are designed to accord with the principles of natural justice and the basic principles of fairness. In particular, the guidance on internal investigations is designed to ensure proper investigation of the matter in question, as well as to be fair to officers under investigation.
Mr. Duncan Smith:
Does not the hon. Gentleman agree--this point was made by Mr. Sutherland--that unless officers believe that their complaint will be not only treated in confidence but investigated by somebody who is beyond reproach and utterly impartial, they will feel that they dare not make a complaint for fear of the consequences that Mr. Sutherland and others reaped in similar cases? Is not that assurance still missing from the procedures?
Mr. O'Brien:
The hon. Gentleman is right to say that we need to ensure confidence in the conduct
In addition to those principles, investigations should be completed as soon as practicable and the investigating officer should ensure that the officer under investigation--and the complainant, if applicable--is kept informed of the progress of the investigation, particularly if there is delay. We certainly want to ensure that where there are long delays and those involved are concerned about the reasons for those delays, an explanation is given.
Mr. Duncan Smith:
I realise that this is not the hon. Gentleman's brief, but will he do one more thing for me and ask the Metropolitan Commissioner and anybody else who is involved whether, given the new attitude that exists, they would be prepared to reconsider the case once more in a positive light?
Mr. O'Brien:
I shall certainly pass on the hon. Gentleman's comments to the Commissioner. I must, however, remind him that a succession of senior officers in the Met have, over a period of 11 years, considered the allegations made by Mr. Sutherland. In no instance has any of those allegations been found to be substantiated. The senior officers have repeatedly examined the papers and they have not concluded that they could take any further action on that matter.
It is important that the investigating officer who is responsible for the inquiry ensures that it is carried out as impartially, confidentially and properly as possible. The investigation of all internal allegations is rightly a management responsibility for the chief officer of the force concerned. Chief officers share the concern to identify and deal with officers who have been accused of abusing their positions, particularly if there is evidence that they have done so.
I am sorry to hear of Mr. Sutherland's disillusionment and his significant health problems and worries, which have arisen partly from his deep concern about these matters. The hon. Gentleman has said that the debate was in many ways a last resort. Bearing in mind what I have said about passing on some of his comments to the Commissioner, the hon. Gentleman can tell his constituent that by raising this matter, he has done all that can be done. I regret that I am not in a position--nor is the Home Office and, I am told, nor is the Commissioner--to help his constituent any further. It is time to say that very clearly to the hon. Gentleman's constituent.
"Integrity lies at the very heart of policing and it is essential to build and maintain trust within the MPS and with Londoners."
I agree with that, but it is a matter of ensuring that that promise is delivered.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |