Police Searches on the Parliamentary Estate - Committee on the Issue of Privilege Contents


Memorandum by Jill Pay, Serjeant at Arms

  1. On Thursday 20 November 2008 Chief Superintendent Ed Bateman (CS Bateman), Head of the Metropolitan Police on the Parliamentary Estate, asked to see me on a basis he described as very confidential. He said that papers concerning a Member of Parliament had been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for consideration. He said that, depending on the CPS advice, either there would be sufficient evidence for the police to make an arrest or there would not be and nothing would happen. He did not say that anything would occur in the precincts, but he did say that if the MP was arrested this would be a very significant event. I asked CS Bateman what it was about and he said he could not tell me anything more at that time. There was no mention of searching a Member's office during this conversation. Nor was the question of consent to search a Member's office raised.

2. On Monday 24 November I met CS Bateman to talk about a different matter and I asked him if there was any more news about the subject we had discussed the previous Thursday. CS Bateman said there was not and that he would let me know as soon as he heard anything.

  3. On Tuesday 25 November, at about 4.30 pm, CS Bateman asked to see me and told me that the CPS considered there was sufficient evidence to support the allegation and that the Member was going to be arrested. He said he could not tell me the identity of the Member or what the allegation was at this stage. CS Bateman told me that the suspect was a very senior Member of the Conservative Party and that the allegation was to do with the recently publicised Home Office leaks. He said that police officers from the MPS Counter Terrorism Command would arrest the Member, possibly the following afternoon, and that they would want to search all of his premises. I asked what he meant by "premises" and CS Bateman listed them: the Member's Westminster office, the constituency office and the two home addresses, in London and the constituency. I asked what the MP was going to be charged with and CS Bateman said that he could not tell me then, but he would bring the investigating police officers from the Counter Terrorism Command to meet me the next day and they would give me more information.

  4. At this stage the possible search of the Westminster Office had been raised with me, but nothing was said abut the mechanics of the search.

  5. CS Bateman again told me on this occasion that all this was very confidential and that I could not tell anyone. I insisted that I had to tell the Speaker to which CS Bateman said "okay, but as long as it is only the Speaker you are telling". CS Bateman made it clear that this whole case was being kept very confidential and that the more people who knew about it from outside the police the greater the risk of prejudicing the criminal investigation.

  6. On Wednesday 26 November I telephoned Angus Sinclair (the Speaker's Secretary) at around 9.30 am and said that I needed to speak to the Speaker as soon as possible on a very confidential subject. Angus Sinclair suggested I wait to see the Speaker before the daily Speaker's conference and when the Speaker arrived Angus Sinclair told him that I needed to speak to him urgently about a very confidential matter. The Speaker and I went to an area where we could speak in private. I told the Speaker that the police had informed me that officers from the Counter Terrorism Command were going to arrest a senior Member of Parliament, a Conservative, possibly that afternoon, and that they would want to search his Westminster Office, his constituency office and his two home addresses immediately after the arrest. I had no more information at that time, but I told the Speaker that I would telephone him later that afternoon when I had more details. The Speaker asked me to call him on his mobile because he would not be in the Palace and he said he would keep the information confidential.

  7. At 3.30 pm on Wednesday 26 November four police officers came to meet with me in my office: Detective Chief Inspector Jim Stockley (senior investigating officer), Detective Inspector Piers Dingmans and Detective Sergeant Steve Walker, all from the Counter Terrorism Command, and Chief Superintendent Ed Bateman. DI Dingmans lead the introductory part of the meeting. I asked him who the Member was, but DI Dingmans said that they could not tell me. He said the fewer people who knew his identity the better and that it was essential to maintain confidentiality.

  8. DCI Stockley told me that the arrest would not happen that afternoon, but he did tell me that the allegation against the Member was "Aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office" and that the police thought there was evidence in the Member's Westminster office to support the allegation. I asked what kind of evidence and DI Dingmans replied, "Evidence that the Member encouraged leaks, that is, that he was pulling leaks rather than receiving them". This conversation led on to the issue of what he described as lawful consent to search.

  9. DI Dingmans stated that for the other three premises the police had obtained search warrants from a District Judge. He explained that for premises occupied by an individual a warrant was necessary, but it was different when an organisation's premises were being searched because then the police would need to ask the person who has authority for the premises to consent to the search. He said this was known as lawful consent.

  10. The officer explained that because this was not one of the Member's homes or the constituency office they would need my consent to search his Westminster office. He said that the police needed lawful consent to search, which I, as Serjeant at Arms, was entitled to give. It was not put to me that I could refuse my consent. At no time did the police officers say that I could insist on a warrant. The police officers convinced me that my lawful consent was what was required instead of a warrant.

  11. I knew that the CPS was satisfied that there was a case to be answered because CS Bateman had told me on Tuesday 25 November that the CPS considered there was sufficient evidence to support the allegation against the Member. I also knew that warrants had been given by a District Judge for the other premises, which the police had told me earlier in the meeting. I asked if it was a civil or a criminal offence and DCI Stockley said it was a serious criminal offence. I had already been told during the meeting that the allegation was "Aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office". I then asked if there would be a criminal investigation and he said there would be. I asked how serious a criminal offence it was and I was told that the Member could receive a sentence of 20 to 25 years for the offence.

  12. From this information I concluded that something very serious had happened and that if I didn't give my consent to search the Member's office I would be obstructing a criminal investigation. I felt under considerable pressure at this stage.

  13. I adjourned the meeting with the police at approximately 4.00 pm to seek advice. DCI Stockley asked who I was going to speak to and I said I would speak to the Clerk of the House if he was available.

  14. I looked for the nearest possible source of advice and visited Douglas Millar, the Clerk Assistant and my line manager. I said to him that I needed advice about whether I had the authority to give consent to a search by the police. Douglas Millar said that I should go to the Clerk of the House (Malcolm Jack) who was the expert in that area. I felt very constrained by the confidentiality imposed on me by the investigating officers.

  15. I went to see Malcolm Jack to ask him if I had the authority to consent to the search of an office on the Parliamentary Estate as part of a criminal investigation. Malcolm Jack said that I had the authority to consent to a search, but that if a search concerned a Member's office I must consult the Speaker.

  16. I went back to the meeting with the police officers at approximately 4.15 pm and informed them that I had authority to consent to the search. But I did not give consent at that point because I still did not know which Member was being arrested. I asked the officers what form my consent would take. The officers said that when they met me next time they would have a consent form with them for me to sign. They did not give me any more details about the case but they arranged to meet me the following morning at 6.45 am to give me more information and to seek my formal consent.

  17. The police convinced me that a warrant was not necessary because what they described as lawful consent could be given instead of a warrant, due to the Palace being an organisation's premises rather than an individual's premises.

  18. After the police had explained to me the method by which I would give formal consent (signing a form) I told them that I would also provide a letter because I thought it would add gravitas to the proceedings. The police replied that I could do that if I wanted to, but that it wasn't necessary.

  19. DS Walker said that the police wanted to see me very early the next day (Thursday 27) because they wanted to make the arrest that morning. Due to the early hour I proposed that the police come to my official residence the next day in view of the confidentiality surrounding the whole matter. I thought this would be more appropriate and discreet as I thought employees of the House might be suspicious if I was seen with a group of police at that time in the Palace. It did not occur to me at the time that I would be unable to speak to anyone to obtain advice at such an early hour.

  20. DCI Stockley again emphasised to me the confidentiality of the situation, but I again stressed that I was going to keep the Speaker informed.

  21. I rang Mr Speaker on his mobile at about 4.20 pm and I told him that the arrest was not taking place that afternoon, but was likely to happen the next morning. I told Mr Speaker that I now knew the allegation against the Member and I read it to him, "Aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office". The Speaker repeated the words and I confirmed the allegation. I then said that the subsequent searches would happen the next morning immediately following the arrest. I had not been told the identity of the Member concerned, and was therefore unable to inform the Speaker of this fact.

  22. I told the Speaker that the police had arranged to meet me at 6.45 am the next morning but I did not think he would want me to telephone him at that time. The Speaker said that I could call him in his private apartments at 7.30 am because he would be getting ready to leave for Glasgow.

  23. On Thursday 27 November at 7am the police arrived at my official residence: Detective Sergeant Steve Walker and Detective Constable Graham Bannatyne from the Counter Terrorism Command, with Chief Superintendent Ed Bateman and Police Constable Doreen Davis (plain clothes) from the Parliamentary police. DS Walker gave me the full background to the matter and identified the Member as Damian Green. He underlined the determination of the police to keep the whole matter confidential. For the sake of accuracy, I went through with the police what I planned to say to the Speaker. I telephoned the Speaker at 7.30 am as arranged and told him that the Member was Damian Green, that he was going to be arrested that morning, I confirmed the allegation as "Aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office" and I said that his offices at Westminster and elsewhere were going to be searched following his arrest. I told the Speaker that the police were with me in my residence and that I had received a formal request from the police to consent to the search of Damian Green's Westminster office which I proposed to give.

  24. The Speaker thanked me for the call and I told the Speaker that I would get in touch with him if the situation changed.

  25. After talking to the Speaker, I signed the consent form. At no time was I informed that I did not have to give my consent, or that I could insist on a warrant, or that I could withdraw my consent at any time. The police then left my house, but the search team remained on the Estate waiting to hear when the arrest had taken place so that they could begin the search.

  26. At 1.50 pm DS Walker called me to inform me that Damian Green had been arrested and that the search was going to commence. I was already in Damian Green's office because his staff were worried and had asked to speak to me. The search commenced at 2.08pm. I did not contact the Speaker again after the conversation on Thursday morning because the situation was as I had explained to him.

  27. I nominated PC Doreen Davis to be my representative during periods when I could not be present at the search.

  28. I left Damian Green's office shortly after the search commenced and went to see Malcolm Jack at about 2.20 pm. I took with me the first draft of my letter to DS Walker and the copy of the consent form I had signed. Malcolm Jack asked to see the warrant and I told him the police had convinced me that the consent form I had signed was lawful consent and was instead of a warrant. I told Malcolm Jack that I had consulted the Speaker on three occasions, the last time at 7.30 that morning.

  29. At the time I thought that I did not need to ask the Speaker to give his consent to the search as I believed I had the authority to give consent to the search myself.

  30. Malcolm Jack said that the letter to DS Walker must include the alleged charge because it had not appeared on the consent form. We agreed the content of the letter and to whom it was to be copied: Damian Green MP, Malcolm Jack, Angus Sinclair, Ed Bateman and Michael Carpenter. [See letter at Annexe A]

  31. I visited Damian Green's office several times during the search and I was notified by PC Doreen Davis at 8.42 pm that the search had been completed at 8.35 pm.

  32. On Friday 28 November I spoke to Damian Green by telephone just after 9.00 am and we agreed that I would go to his office at 9.30. I gave him the copy of my letter to DS Walker. Damian Green was furious that I had given consent for his office to be searched, but we agreed that our conversation at that time must be about how he could continue his work as a Member of Parliament. After our meeting, I arranged for PICT to provide computers, a printer and a fax machine to enable Damian Green and his staff to work. I contacted DS Walker and arranged for Damian Green's diary and Filofax to be photocopied and these photocopies were delivered to his staff later on Friday, along with a photocopy of the Exhibits Book that contained details of all the items removed during the search of his office and from where in the office they were removed.

  33. During Friday morning, I had asked Chief Superintendent Bateman for a definitive statement about the difference between seeking a signed consent form and a search warrant. Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick telephoned on Friday afternoon to explain this to me and CS Bateman sent me a confirmatory e-mail on the following Monday, which was the briefing note used during the telephone conversation. This read:

    "The MPS had reasonable grounds to arrest an MP for conspiracy/aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office. In order to secure evidence for this investigation they have identified four addresses linked to him which they need to search. Search warrants have been issued for three of those addresses under section 8 of PACE. In order for them to be issued a District Judge has agreed with the information supplied by police and has issued the relevant authority for their execution.

    The fourth address is the MP's private office and a warrant for this address can't be issued if permission can be granted by the person in control of it or who has authority for the premises. Consequently permission was asked from the Serjeant at Arms to search the premises and was duly granted."

1 December 2009



 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2010
Prepared 22 March 2010