Downing Street Says

In response to a question, Mr Straw repeated his view, expressed during Business Questions earlier, that there should be a police investigation rather than an internal Whitehall inquiry if there was any evidence for the allegations. The Leader said that prime facie evidence, not just assertion, was required. If there was such evidence, it should be put to the police because interfering in a criminal investigation was serious. He said that distinguished the present issue from other cases being quoted at length of leak inquiries, where the matter was a breach of internal security.

Asked why the Prime Minister had ruled out an inquiry, the Leader referred to what he had told the House, which seemed to have been very straightforward. Put to him that the Prime Minister shared his view, Mr Straw said it was the other way round!

To a suggestion that, strictly speaking, those who were the subject of other types of leak inquiries had committed a criminal offence, he said it would vary, depending on the facts. He pointed out that sometimes they had been the subject of criminal investigation – on other occasions they had been investigated by Cabinet Office personnel or from elsewhere.

He recounted that, at the time previously when he had been a special adviser, he had been among a number of people subjected to such a police inquiry, adding that he had not been guilty! It was suggested to him that, since the police had indicated there was a prime facie case of a crime being committed in the leak of the counter-terrorism investigation, it was merely necessary for the police to initiate an inquiry before evidence was provided. Mr Straw said that, according to DAC Peter Clarke, there plainly was a leak. As to whether or not an inquiry could make progress, that would require some prime facie evidence. The Leader again said that anyone could approach the police if they had any evidence which would allow an inquiry to proceed; he had no evidence personally and the Prime Minister had indicated that he was not aware of any.

Asked when he had been the subject of the police investigation, the Leader said it had been in the spring of 1976. It had related to the leak of a limited circulation confidential annexe to Cabinet minutes. He stressed that he had been among a large number of people who had been interviewed.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Thursday, April 26, 2007

Leaks

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries