| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Antisocial Behaviour
22. Mr. David Kidney (Stafford): What action she intends to take to establish a body of prosecutors with expertise in prosecuting cases involving antisocial behaviour. [135226]
25. Vera Baird (Redcar): What plans she has for the introduction of specialist antisocial behaviour prosecutors. [135251]
The Solicitor-General: Plans are being developed for between 10 and 12 specialist prosecutors, leading Crown Prosecution Service work on prosecuting antisocial behaviour. They will develop and lead the work, which will be undertaken in all areas to improve the way in which the criminal justice system responds to antisocial behaviour.
Mr. Kidney : I have read the Home Office action plan, "Together Tackling Anti-Social Behaviour". Is it not unalloyed good news that the Government are intensifying action to protect the great majority of our constituents from the unacceptable antisocial behaviour of a small minority? Is it not important that the whole of the criminal justice system work together to ensure that action is successful? Will my right hon. and learned Friend assure me that in all parts of the country the police and the courts will have access to those specialist prosecutors?
The Solicitor-General: I agree that it is good news that progress is being made on this area of work. I also strongly agree that there needs to be a partnership, with the Crown Prosecution Service, the police, the prosecutors and the courts all working together. That is progressing. I am sure that he will agree that we also need a wider partnership. That brings us to being
- "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".
Vera Baird : Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that people bailed on antisocial behaviour charges often
try to frighten their victims to stop them testifying? In Teesside, they are usually given bail again on condition that they do not do so. Of course, they are not supposed to see prosecution witnesses when they are on bail. To tell them that if they do see prosecution witnesses they will suffer a condition telling them not to see them is judicial conduct from the planet Zog. The Crown Prosecution Service has the power to appeal against those grants of bail. It is my experience and that of the Recorder of Middlesbrough, with whom I have corresponded on the matter, that this very rarely happens. Does that not make an urgent case for antisocial behaviour specialist prosecutors who will use all their powers?
Mr. Speaker: Order. In future, I expect the hon. and learned Member for Redcar (Vera Baird) to put her question at the beginning of her speech. It is always better to put the question first.
The Solicitor-General: My hon. and learned Friend raises two important matters. One is the enforcement of the antisocial behaviour legislation and the other is the granting or refusing of bail and the enforcing of bail conditions. Without trying to deal with all the important areas that she raised—perhaps I may write to her with more detail—I will say that the circumstances that she described amount to a breach of bail conditions, which is itself a criminal offence, and they may amount to perverting the course of justice. Specialist prosecutors will work with local authorities. In her area, Redcar and Cleveland council, two orders were made in the last year for which figures are available and two more orders were made at the High Court. None of them was refused. I spoke to the chief Crown prosecutor in her area, David Magson, this morning, who told me that no file of evidence that has been brought for breach of an antisocial behaviour order has been discontinued; all have been taken to court and have been successful.
Guantanamo Bay Detainees
23. Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome): What recent discussions the Attorney-General has had with the United States authorities on the legal position of British citizens detained at Guantanamo bay. [135227]
The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General went to Washington in July for talks with the US Administration about the future of the United Kingdom detainees in Guantanamo bay. Since then, he has had four further meetings with the US authorities, the most recent being on 3 October.
Mr. Heath: Can the Solicitor-General tell me with whom precisely the Attorney-General has been holding meetings? Is it the US Attorney-General, who claims that Guantanamo bay is beyond his jurisdiction, or is it the Department of Defence? Before the President of the United States visits this country shortly, will there be a resolution of the wholly unacceptable position whereby British citizens are held at Guantanamo bay and not subject to due process?
The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General has held meetings with his counterpart, the Attorney-General of the United States, and with officials from the Department of Defence. As the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and others have placed it on record, I take this opportunity to remind the House that the Attorney-General has been holding discussions with the US authorities and has been seeking undertakings that if UK citizens are put on trial in the US they will have a fair trial. We have made it clear that if the Attorney-General is not satisfied that those citizens would receive a fair trial under the United States' procedures they will be returned to the UK. The hon. Gentleman can be satisfied that either they will have a fair trial or they will be returned to the UK. As negotiations are continuing, I am afraid that I can say nothing further about timing.
Business of the House
12.31 pm
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst): May we please have the business for next week?
The Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Peter Hain): The business for next week will be as follows:
Monday 3 November—Remaining stages of the Sexual Offences Bill [Lords].
Tuesday 4 November—A debate on the quality of life in local communities on a motion for the Adjournment of the House, followed by a debate on African development strategies on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Wednesday 5 November—Opposition half-day [6th Allotted Day]. There will be a half-day debate on an Opposition motion, subject to be announced, followed by a debate on making a success of vocational education on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Thursday 6 November—Motions to approve programming and deferred Divisions in Sessional Orders.
Friday 7 November—The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the following week will include:
Monday 10 November—Remaining stages of the Water Bill [Lords].
Tuesday 11 November—Remaining stages of the Arms Control and Disarmament (Inspections) Bill [Lords], followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the European Union (Accessions) Bill, followed by a debate on reforming the United Nations on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Mr. Forth: I thank the part-time Leader of the House for giving us the business.
Mr. Speaker, you and the House may be aware that, as we speak, the memorial service for Sir Denis Thatcher is taking place. I would have been there if my duties had not kept me in the House, but I hope that you think it appropriate that we record the unique contribution that Sir Denis made to our public life. After all, without Sir Denis there would have been no Thatcherism. As we speak, the memorial service is, happily, packed to overflowing with the many, many friends and admirers of Sir Denis. My thoughts and, I hope, those of all Members present are with Lady Thatcher, her family and the many, many friends of Lady Thatcher and Sir Denis.
Is the part-time Leader of the House somewhat ashamed about the inadequacy of the amount of time allocated yesterday to an important debate on cannabis? I was shocked when I looked at Hansard this morning and noted that a mere 90 minutes of parliamentary time had been allocated to that important subject and that, of that 90 minutes, the three Front-Bench speeches took 70 minutes, allowing only four Back Benchers to share 20 minutes. Surely that cannot be right. It cannot be adequate that a matter of such importance, which raised much anxiety on the Government Benches, never mind across the House, was allowed only 90 minutes. Cannot the Government do something more sensible than that?
It is not as though, sadly, we are pressed for time at present, Mr. Speaker, as you must be well aware—as am I. I make a plea that even if the subject cannot be revisited on this occasion, when it comes up in future proper time will be given so that Members on both sides of the House can make a proper contribution that reflects the real anxiety of their constituents.Is the part-time Leader of the House able to do anything at all about the current disruption to communications between MPs and their constituents due to the wildcat strikes in the postal service? I hope that this matter is being given the close attention of the authorities in the House and the Post Office. It is bad enough to have communications generally disrupted, but knowing the value that we all place on the ability of our constituents to communicate with us and us with them, I hope that something is being done to ensure that those kinds of actions will not be allowed to get between us and our constituents. I hope that the part-time Leader can reassure us on that matter.
It is high time that we had a proper debate, rather than just brief exchanges, on the increasingly worrying matter of the Prime Minister, General de Chastelain and IRA decommissioning. If we look at Hansard, we find that, for example, on 27 October my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham and Stamford (Mr. Davies) said:
- "General de Chastelain has . . . made it quite clear that he never gave any additional information to the Prime Minister".—[Official Report, 27 October 2003; Vol. 412, c. 22.]
- "people would be satisfied if they knew the full details."—[Official Report, 22 October 2003; Vol. 411, c. 634.]
- "the Prime Minister and the Taioseach have been able to learn more about the decommissioning event than was set out either in the brief statement issued last Tuesday by the two members of the Decommissioning Commision"—
- "left with a greater sense of the nature of the decommissioning event than would be apparent from the statement and the press conference alone."—[Official Report, 27 October 2003; Vol. 412, c. 21.]
- "the two commissioners were able to convey and build confidence in both the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach that the event that they had seen was substantial and significantly more than had happened in the past."—[Official Report, 27 October 2003; Vol. 412, c. 26.]
- "certain information was given to us by General de Chastelain and I had very much hoped that it would have been possible to provide the full information to everybody."—[Official Report, 29 October 2003; Vol. 412, c. 300.]
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |