Tim Loughton, former children's minister, says he is considering 'nuclear option' of naming members of alleged Westminster paedophile ring in Parliament.
The former minister has revealed he is prepared to use Parliamentary privilege to name suspected paedophiles.
Tim Loughton, the former children’s minister, said he is considering deploying the “nuclear option” of naming members of a suspected Westminster paedophile ring on the floor of the House of Commons.
Under a British constitutional convention, comments made in parliament are protected from libel action.
Details of the alleged network running through Whitehall and Parliament were contained in a dossier that was passed by Geoffery Dickens, a Tory MP, to Leon Brittan, then the Home Secretary.
Lord Brittan has confirmed he received a “substantial bundle of papers” but the Home Office has admitted the papers were lost or destroyed.
Mr Loughton wrote in the Daily Mail: “There will be those who will want to know why I and my colleagues do not use Parliamentary privilege to name and shame suspected paedophiles in the Commons. I call it the nuclear option, and it might come to that.
He added: “But we don’t want to compromise any police investigation. We need to make sure police have had every opportunity to pursue evidence. It is deeply frustrating but some patience has to be exercised.”
Lord Tebbit, a fellow former Cabinet member, said Lord Brittan must explain fully what happened to the file.
“He should deal with the accusations which have been made. People will then have to assess for themselves,” he said.
Some 130 MPs have backed a full parliamentary inquiry into allegations of a paedophilia ring in Westminster.
It will encourage other alleged victims to come forward and establish why the Dickens dossier of alleged abuse disappeared, Mr Loughton said.
Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph can disclose that four previously unknown cases of historic sex abuse have been referred to the police by Home Office officials in recent months.
An internal review of hundreds of thousands of Home Office files found 13 previously undisclosed “items of alleged child abuse” last year.
The Home Office said that nine of the 13 cases had been reported to the police – including four which involved the department’s officials.
However, the remaining four were overlooked by civil servants – and have now been reported to the Metropolitan Police.
The cases were unearthed by an internal review ordered by the Home Office’s permanent secretary Mark Sedwill in February last year, months after the scandal involving former Liberal MP Cyril Smith broke.
“The Investigator considers that the remaining 4 items of information are likely to be of limited value, as they are either of doubtful credibility or involve the use of a single profile indicator to identify a potential offender.
“However it is recommended that the information is passed to the Police for a proper assessment as this falls within their remit.”
The Home Office said that all the recommendations had now been implemented, which meant they have been referred to the Police.
The review also said that it had “identified 11 centrally recorded files from the 1980s relating to the Paedophile Information Exchange, all of which had been destroyed”.
It added: “The recorded file titles, together with media reports of events at the time, give some indication of the probable contents of these files from which the Investigator has concluded that their destruction was consistent with applicable record retention policies.”
It concluded: “The independent investigator is satisfied that the Home Office did pass on to the appropriate authorities any information received about child abuse in the period 1979 to 1999 which was credible and which had realistic potential for further investigation.
“The investigator believes that the risk of any undisclosed material remaining in files form that period is extremely low.”
Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale who has been campaigning on historic child abuse, questioned why the Home Office had not passed on the cases to the police earlier.
He said: “It’s never the job of the Home Office to try and determine what constituted potential evidence, that's the job of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
“The public will think that people in the Home Office were withholding information from the police which could have led to the successful prosecution of child sex abusers.
“Had the evidence been passed to the police at the time they might have been able to link it to other information in their possession and build a case against someone.”
He added: “The public are left wondering why the Home Office didn’t pass on the four cases to the police when they initially received the information, some years ago.
“The more we delve into historic child sex abuse and the role of the Home Office the more concerns are raised. This is why we now need an independent overarching enquiry into historic child sex abuse.”
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said it was considering a request for comment from The Daily Telegraph, but could not comment at the time of going to press.
The Home Office had failed to respond to requests for comment at the time of going to press.
The former minister has revealed he is prepared to use Parliamentary privilege to name suspected paedophiles.
 |
| Lord Brittan and MP Tim Loughton |
Under a British constitutional convention, comments made in parliament are protected from libel action.
Details of the alleged network running through Whitehall and Parliament were contained in a dossier that was passed by Geoffery Dickens, a Tory MP, to Leon Brittan, then the Home Secretary.
Lord Brittan has confirmed he received a “substantial bundle of papers” but the Home Office has admitted the papers were lost or destroyed.
Mr Loughton wrote in the Daily Mail: “There will be those who will want to know why I and my colleagues do not use Parliamentary privilege to name and shame suspected paedophiles in the Commons. I call it the nuclear option, and it might come to that.
He added: “But we don’t want to compromise any police investigation. We need to make sure police have had every opportunity to pursue evidence. It is deeply frustrating but some patience has to be exercised.”
Lord Tebbit, a fellow former Cabinet member, said Lord Brittan must explain fully what happened to the file.
“He should deal with the accusations which have been made. People will then have to assess for themselves,” he said.
Some 130 MPs have backed a full parliamentary inquiry into allegations of a paedophilia ring in Westminster.
It will encourage other alleged victims to come forward and establish why the Dickens dossier of alleged abuse disappeared, Mr Loughton said.
Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph can disclose that four previously unknown cases of historic sex abuse have been referred to the police by Home Office officials in recent months.
An internal review of hundreds of thousands of Home Office files found 13 previously undisclosed “items of alleged child abuse” last year.
The Home Office said that nine of the 13 cases had been reported to the police – including four which involved the department’s officials.
However, the remaining four were overlooked by civil servants – and have now been reported to the Metropolitan Police.
The cases were unearthed by an internal review ordered by the Home Office’s permanent secretary Mark Sedwill in February last year, months after the scandal involving former Liberal MP Cyril Smith broke.
“The Investigator considers that the remaining 4 items of information are likely to be of limited value, as they are either of doubtful credibility or involve the use of a single profile indicator to identify a potential offender.
“However it is recommended that the information is passed to the Police for a proper assessment as this falls within their remit.”
The Home Office said that all the recommendations had now been implemented, which meant they have been referred to the Police.
The review also said that it had “identified 11 centrally recorded files from the 1980s relating to the Paedophile Information Exchange, all of which had been destroyed”.
It added: “The recorded file titles, together with media reports of events at the time, give some indication of the probable contents of these files from which the Investigator has concluded that their destruction was consistent with applicable record retention policies.”
It concluded: “The independent investigator is satisfied that the Home Office did pass on to the appropriate authorities any information received about child abuse in the period 1979 to 1999 which was credible and which had realistic potential for further investigation.
“The investigator believes that the risk of any undisclosed material remaining in files form that period is extremely low.”
Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale who has been campaigning on historic child abuse, questioned why the Home Office had not passed on the cases to the police earlier.
He said: “It’s never the job of the Home Office to try and determine what constituted potential evidence, that's the job of the police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
“The public will think that people in the Home Office were withholding information from the police which could have led to the successful prosecution of child sex abusers.
“Had the evidence been passed to the police at the time they might have been able to link it to other information in their possession and build a case against someone.”
He added: “The public are left wondering why the Home Office didn’t pass on the four cases to the police when they initially received the information, some years ago.
“The more we delve into historic child sex abuse and the role of the Home Office the more concerns are raised. This is why we now need an independent overarching enquiry into historic child sex abuse.”
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said it was considering a request for comment from The Daily Telegraph, but could not comment at the time of going to press.
The Home Office had failed to respond to requests for comment at the time of going to press.
No comments:
Post a Comment