THURSDAY, 4 DECEMBER 2008
Mr Speaker Misled the House Yesterday
In his statement to the House of Commons on the raid of Damian Green's House of Commons office, Mr Speaker said:
"I have been told that the police did not explain, as they are required to do, that the Serjeant was not obliged to consent, or that a warrant could have been insisted upon."
House of Commons Hansard 3 Dec 2008: Column 1.
Yet on 3 December, Assistant Commissioner Robert Quick QPM MBA wrote to the Home Secretary, saying:
"The officers informed the Serjeant at Arms that the provisions of Section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act required that they first seek consent of the person who occupies or controls the premises where they believe evidence may be found."
Letter: Assistant Commissioner Robert Quick QPM MBA to the Home Secretary, 3 December 2008, in House of Commons Library Deposited Papers.
That directly contradicts what Mr Speaker told the House of Commons.
So who's telling the truth, and who's lying? Well, Machiavelli has it from an incontrovertible source that the police are not misleading the Home Secretary. So it is Mr Speaker who misled the House of Commons yesterday. He should resign.
Update: Seems to be a little confusion amongst some as to the difference in the two statements. The Speaker said the Serjeant wasn't informed she was not "obliged to consent", the police said that they were "required [to] seek consent". If one party is required to seek consent, it necessarily follows (and indeed means) that the other party is not obliged to consent.
"I have been told that the police did not explain, as they are required to do, that the Serjeant was not obliged to consent, or that a warrant could have been insisted upon."
House of Commons Hansard 3 Dec 2008: Column 1.
Yet on 3 December, Assistant Commissioner Robert Quick QPM MBA wrote to the Home Secretary, saying:
"The officers informed the Serjeant at Arms that the provisions of Section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act required that they first seek consent of the person who occupies or controls the premises where they believe evidence may be found."
Letter: Assistant Commissioner Robert Quick QPM MBA to the Home Secretary, 3 December 2008, in House of Commons Library Deposited Papers.
That directly contradicts what Mr Speaker told the House of Commons.
So who's telling the truth, and who's lying? Well, Machiavelli has it from an incontrovertible source that the police are not misleading the Home Secretary. So it is Mr Speaker who misled the House of Commons yesterday. He should resign.
Update: Seems to be a little confusion amongst some as to the difference in the two statements. The Speaker said the Serjeant wasn't informed she was not "obliged to consent", the police said that they were "required [to] seek consent". If one party is required to seek consent, it necessarily follows (and indeed means) that the other party is not obliged to consent.
LABELS: LABOUR'S SPEAKER
Posts
