asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further consideration he has given for granting an amnesty for illegally-held firearms.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I are giving further thought to the timing of an amnesty.

Is the Home Secretary aware of the increasing public concern at the number of criminal offences in which guns are carried and often used? Does he appreciate the ease with which firearms can be bought in London and other large cities? Is it not time that we had an amnesty, after which anyone caught in possession of unlawfully held arms should be most severely dealt with?

Certainly, Ministers accept in principle that there now ought to be an amnesty. Its timing has to be considered in conjunction with legislation. My right hon. Friend and I are still considering the many representations which we had on our Green Paper.

Does not the Home Secretary agree that the essential of the exercise is to reduce the pool of illegally held weapons in Britain? Would this not be better accomplished by authorising what, in effect, would be a perpetual amnesty by authorising certain arms dealers to buy weapons which might be offered to them with no questions asked, including fully automatic weapons, which would, many of us are convinced, have the effect of so reducing the pool of illegally-held weapons?

That is one of the matters which has been submitted to us for consideration. There are genuine difficulties about it. I am considering the possibility raised by the hon. Member for Bradford, North (Mr. Ben Ford), but my right hon. Friend and I have as yet reached no conclusion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will arrange for complaints against the police to be investigated by officers of his Department and not by the police.

No, Sir. I do not think that this would be practicable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman think again about this? I know that it is difficult but, as his hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State will be aware, in my constituency there is currently a complaint against an investigating officer who is alleged to have taken an extremely hostile attitude towards constituents who had complained against the local police. The police necessarily have a loyalty to their own force and there might be something to be said from the point of view of the police themselves if complaints against them were investigated not by them but by an official of the Department or by someone else outside the force.

As the hon. Member says, it is a difficult matter because the skill and expertise required for such investigations exist sufficiently only in the police force. One is dealing with about 15,000 complaints a year. I think that the best way to make progress in this matter would be to introduce an independent element into existing procedures.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is now in a position to make a statement on his proposal to change the procedure for the handling of complaints against the police.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is yet in a position to announce the setting up of extra machinery to inquire into allegations of police malpractices.

The working group which I have set up for the purpose of consultation with the police representative bodies has now submitted its report. I am arranging for the report to be published and will make a further statement at the time of publication.

Will my right hon. Friend give an estimate of when he will make that statement? Does he agree that the test of any new scheme he might propose is that it should demonstrate the complete impartiality of the investigation of complaints? In that case, will he examine the complaints branch at Scotland Yard, which has worked extremely well, to see whether that kind of scheme can be extended elsewhere?

I take note of the second part of that question but I should be wrong to comment on matters of substance until the report is published. I had hoped to have the report before the House by the end of the year and I apologise for not having quite made that date. I certainly hope to make it in February.

Is the Home Secretary aware that the news he has just given is most welcome? Unfortunately it is a little late. We hope it will not be too long before he comes forward with a positive arrangement. The Police Federation has agreed in general terms that one is required and that in some of the investigations carried out by the police they have been judge and jury in their own cause. We hope that any new machinery will greatly improve upon the existing situation.

I am sorry that the report is a little late, but it has been a difficult matter. However, I hope that no one will underestimate the very high standard and reputation of our police and their systems of investigation.

Is the Home Secretary aware that the high standing of the police is being detracted from by the system operated particularly in the Metropolitan Police District where charges that should be laid under the Act dealing with police discipline against particular officers are being dealt with outside the disciplinary code under the policy of interchange? Is he aware that I have been in correspondence with his Department over a number of months in connection with the case of a sergeant in the CID who was transferred under interchange when he should have been dealt with, if he had committed a disciplinary offence, under the discipline Act? Will the right hon. Gentleman take action to deal with this unsatisfactory situation?

That is very wide of the Question but I shall, of course, take a special interest in the case referred to by the hon. Member.

About time.

Since we discussed this matter during the proceedings on the Bill sponsored by my hon. Friend the Member for Derby, North (Mr. Whitehead) there have been a number of important developments. Perhaps the most revolutionary of all is the proposal put forward by the Police Federation which would not only introduce a lay element into the adjudication but would require some kind of lay person in each police authority in order to investigate the complaints. This has been frowned upon by the Association of Chief Police Officers. Is it not right, however, that in the interests of the public there should be some support for the Police Federation's proposals, which are far more revolutionary than the attitude adopted by the chief officers?

We shall have to await the report. That will be the time for questioning and debate.

I thank the Home Secretary for bringing forward the report now in response to the Bill I introduced last year. Will he confirm that at least he has not ruled out the possibility of legislation since the extension of the A10 scheme in the Metropolitan District, though perhaps necessary and desirable, would not necessarily fulfil what is known to be required for all forces?

Of course I shall take account of what the hon. Member has said, but in the meantime we shall have to await the report.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on measures to control terrorist attacks.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on measures to control terrorist attacks.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will make a statement about measures to control political terrorist attacks.

The Government attach the highest importance to measures to counter the threat of terrorist attacks. The appropriateness of the measures is kept under constant review.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. May I take this opportunity to congratulate him on his speed of reaction to the recent threat at Heathrow Airport? Would it not be for the public good to make more information available about the exact nature of that threat and, indeed, about other terrorist threats to this country? As the surveillance task is likely to be very great in relation to the area of London Airport, will my right hon. Friend consider augmenting the forces available for surveillance, in particular the Special Constabulary, and will he launch a major recruiting campaign?

I thank my hon. Friend for his congratulations, which I shall pass on in full measure to those who have done the job. Making such information available on a matter of this kind is difficult, for obvious reasons. I made clear, however, shortly after the action at Heathrow Airport was taken, that it was necessary, our judgment being based upon concrete signs of increased terrorist activity both in this country and in Europe and on some general information we received about the vulnerability of London Airport.

Following the events at Heathrow, will the right hon. Gentleman give two firm undertakings: first that there will be no combined military and police operations in industrial disputes or against peaceful political demonstrations, and second that there will be no discussions between Scotland Yard and the Ministry of Defence regarding the new centre which has been set up to deal with picketing?

I am not sure what the hon. Member has in mind with the second leg of his supplementary question about the new centre. Let me make it quite clear—because I have said this often in the House over the last 18 months—that the new centre is an intelligence and information room at Scotland Yard to give information to police forces about the plans for any mass picketing and so on which might arise. There is no secret about that and there is nothing sinister about it ; nor is there any military connection with it. It is an information room for the use of the police, and of the police alone.

As terrorists are now increasingly mobile and increasingly able to operate in foreign countries, should we not welcome any evidence of increased co-operation between our own intelligence services and, for instance, the CIA and the intelligence services of our European allies? As there is also evidence that diplomatic bags have been used occasionally to transfer weapons from one country to another, can my right hon. Friend say whether he will take an increasingly close look at diplomatic luggage?

As my hon. Friend will appreciate, any questions about the use of diplomatic bags and so on are for my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary. I had better not start replying on that subject. As to the first part of the question, we simply have to face the fact that, as crime, illegal immigration and terrorism are all increasingly operated on an international basis, international co-operation becomes more and more important.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the co-operation of the general public is essential in combating terrorism? Therefore, would he be a little more forthcoming about the nature of the threat at London Airport and elsewhere? To what extent is the use of troops made necessary at London Airport by the depletion of the Metropolitan Police Force in the last 18 months by over 500 male policemen, and to what extent are the troops being used in a way as a substitute for paying policemen in London an adequate salary to keep up the numbers of an already depleted force?

In answer to the latter part of mat question, not at all. The need for the use of troops in an operation like this was twofold. Principally it was because we had to include in our contingency plans the possibility that we might have to deal with terrorists using sophisticated weapons. Police simply are not equipped or trained to deal with that sort of threat and, therefore, troops are essential if one anticipates the possibility of that sort of threat. In addition to that, but secondary to that first point, is the question of sheer numbers involved in patrolling a vast area like the perimeter and surroundings of a great airport like Heathrow. With due respect to the hon. Member, while of course the more police we have the better, the numbers involved are far greater than can be made good merely by making good the deficiency in the Metropolitan Police.

Will my right hon. Friend reject the philosophy propounded by Labour Members that there is something immoral about calling in the troops to assist the police in aid of the civil power? This is a long-established principle in the United Kingdom. Is he aware that there are more than 50,000 Territorial soldiers at the disposal of the Regular Forces? Will he consult his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence to see whether it would be possible to alter the law to allow these troops to be called upon in such circumstances as existed at Heathrow to do some of the more mundane chores?

It certainly is a long-established principle in our constitution and practice that troops can be called in in aid of the civil power. I hope that nobody disputes that. I hope also that everyone will agree that this is something which should be done only when it is essential and that it should not be undertaken at all lightly or easily. Anyhow, in dealing with this sort of operation, it is probably better, on the troops' side as on the police side, to keep this part of the task for the professionals, using, if I may so call them, the volunteer back-up forces to do the more general duties.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that he repudiates what appeared to be the thought behind the question asked by the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Mr. Wiggin) that it is positively desirable to have troops, whether Territorial or otherwise, mixed up in police operations as often as possible?

I thought I had made that clear: I certainly do. But I still must maintain, as I am sure the right hon. Gentleman would, that it is both traditional and proper to call in troops in aid of the civil power. The first thing, however, is to see that the civil power can cope with as much as possible without them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is satisfied that the powers he has are adequate to deal with political terrorism.

I have no plans at present to seek additional powers but I shall not hesitate to do so if changed circumstances make them necessary.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer which, with his earlier answers, will give much comfort to most people, if not to all Opposition Members. May I ask him not to hesitate to come to the House if he needs more powers, particularly in view of difficulties which other countries have been having concerning terrorism?

I thank my hon. Friend for the first part of his question, and I assure him on the latter part.

Despite the assurance which he gave earlier, was not the Home Secretary over-reacting in agreeing to the use of troops at Heathrow Airport when there was no evidence, as he accepted on television, that terrorists armed with missiles had got into this country? Ought he not to be very careful about such matters, bearing in mind that there are elements in the police and the military who are attracted by the theories of Brigadier Kitson and who welcome opportunities, particularly at times of political or industrial tension, to wheel out tanks, whatever the risk?

asked the Secretary that at all. I have not over-reacted. What had been seen to happen in other countries and information reaching us made it a necessary and prudent step to take, and I should have been failing in my responsibility if I had not taken it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what new occupations he has introduced into the prison system since 1970 in the light of recommendations made in 1967 about the need to find suitable work for the more intelligent prisoners.

New occupations include data processing, technical drawing and typewriting, and work in prison industries connected with quality, stock and shop floor control, inspection and work study.

Can the hon. and learned Gentleman consider the indexing of legal documents and other kinds of records, as I understand is now being done in Scotland, where the precognitions since 1820 are being indexed? As there are always some lawyers, accountants, doctors and people of that kind in prison, would not this be a very useful way of using their talents?

I am aware, of course, of the proposals put by the Estimates Committee, of which the hon. Lady was chairman, and we have considered this. Some work has been obtained from the Public Records Office and from the Meteorological Office. But we find that work on records requires extensive organisation and staff and we are attempting to concentrate more on providing experience in what might be called modern white collar work.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what amount of the extra funds announced for the urban aid programme will go to the London borough of Ealing.

My right hon. Friend is not at present in a position to enlarge on what he said on 6th December in the debate on immigration and race relations.—[Vol. 865, c. 1469–85.]

The hon. Gentleman is aware, I know, of the massive problems afflicting the administration of the London borough of Ealing, particularly in race relations, homelessness and education. Is he prepared, from his own knowledge alone, to see what can be done almost immediately to aid Ealing in dealing with these problems, which are growing larger day by day, frustrating councillors of both political parties and causing grave anguish throughout the borough? Will he do all he can to see how much urban aid can be given to the borough, and as swiftly as possible?

Yes, I will. I have visited Ealing fairly recently. The hon. Gentleman will remember that in the last phase of the urban programme we were able to approve a housing aid centre, a play centre and a special assessment unit for children with learning and behaviour difficulties. I hope that we will be able to give further aid to Ealing on as generous a scale as we can.

Has the Minister cleared up the question of withdrawing the urban aid grant to the London borough of Ealing in connection with the bussing of school children? Will he bear in mind that there are deeply conflicting attitudes about the continuance of the policy? With the best will in the world, the change cannot happen overnight. New primary schools have to be built in the Southall part of the borough in order to cope with the problem there. Will he say that the Department has changed its attitude of not giving, the normal assistance? Will he look at this matter seriously?

We are looking at the matter with the Department of Education and Science, but I can say no more about it today.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the criteria used to decide which applications are granted under the urban aid programme.

The urban programme aims to give special help to local urban areas with acute social needs. Applications are selected for approval in the light of local authorities' own priorities and the Government's wish to encourage variety in the projects to be embarked upon and the inclusion of schemes sponsored by voluntary bodies.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great deal of confusion, not to say dismay, among members of local authorities and voluntary bodies about the way that cash is being allocated under the urban aid programme? A recent article in the Association of Municipal Corporations Review indicated that local authorities might well be advised not to include projects in their normal financial schemes but instead to make urban aid applications. Is not this a denial of the entire purpose of the urban aid scheme——

Order. There must be a time limit.

I am constantly looking at the way the urban programme is working and I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman says. My experience, from talking to a number of local authorities, is that the programme is very much appreciated. There are always ways of improving its working as we increase expenditure on the programme year by year. I hope that we can draw closer together the central Government, local authorities and voluntary bodies.

Will my hon. Friend consider making the programme more flexible so that in certain cases voluntary organisations can apply direct to the Home Office for grants?

I am continually discussing the working of the programme with voluntary bodies and local authorities. This is a difficult matter and I do not think it would be wise to have any change at the moment, but I shall keep my hon. Friend's suggestion in mind.

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm whether the presently publicised urban aid programme will be cut as a result of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's public expenditure programme?

I cannot guarantee that there will not be some effect on the programme, but I hope that any effect will mean that the rate of reduction of public expenditure on the programme will be very small.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish the amount which he proposes to spend on research into the causes of crime both as a sum and as a percentage of his total departmental expenditure in 1974–75.

In the financial year 1974–75, subject to parliamentary approval of Estimates, the Home Office is expected to spend about £514,000 on research into crime, including its causes. This would be approximately 0·1 per cent. of the Department's total expenditure in that period.

Does not the Minister regard that sum as miserly compared with the amount spent on treating the symptoms of crime? If he does not, will he indicate why there has been a rise in crimes of violence against the person of almost 50 per cent. since the Government took office?

One could hardly call more than £500,000 miserly. It must be related to the general competing needs of overall Government expenditure. A great deal of the expenditure of the Home Office goes in the provision for the police force and probation service. I cannot comment on the hon. Member's second point immediately. Of course we are concerned about the increase in crimes of violence but surely the hon. Member, like all hon. Members, will welcome the fact that crime overall has shown a reduction in the last few months.

In view of the success of the Cambridge Institute of Criminology, will my hon. and learned Friend consider setting up another such institute?

I shall convey that view to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will inquire of the Director General of Fair Trading whether he is satisfied with the scope of his powers to collect evidence as to the safety of consumer products.

Under the Fair Trading Act the duties of the Director General in this field are to receive and collate evidence which becomes available to him. If, after experience of operating under the Act, he feels that it needs amendment, I am sure that he will make this known.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I am now exercising the female prerogative of nagging him on this subject? Although the House welcomes the steps he has taken in the co-ordination of this information, substantial gaps still remain, particularly since vital statistics are collected in another Department and the Director General is not empowered to investigate. It is the investigation that we are worried about.

I am always happy to be nagged by my hon. Friend. I know that investigation is the problem and, as part of the work we do in close co-operation with the Department of Trade and Industry, the Home Office now has a research project on under which we are acquiring data about home accidents in Bromley, Gateshead, Huddersfield, Northampton, Norwich and Southampton. I hope that my hon. Friend will continue her campaign so that we may get some fast action.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will institute a full and impartial inquiry into the value of the jury system.

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend will be glad to consider any arguments that my hon. and learned Friend wishes to put before him, but he is not persuaded that such an inquiry is desirable.

Will my hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that, contrary to what was said in the recent television lecture by the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, many of us, laymen as well as lawyers, who want to see trial by jury preserved but fear for its future, would welcome an immediate and authoritative inquiry into the value of the system? Does he agree that it would be wrong to allow public confidence in trial by jury to be undermined by what must largely be uninformed opinion? In these circumstances, will he accept that the need for an inquiry is urgent?

I fully accept what my hon. and learned Friend says that we should do nothing to undermine public confidence in trial by jury. Of course, my right hon. Friend and I will carefully consider any proposals which my hon. and learned Friend wishes to put to us. We have looked at this matter but it raises one real difficulty. Any such inquiry would mean violating the secrecy of the jury room, and strong grounds are necessary before such an inquiry could be mounted. It is equally difficult to know how to evaluate in the way my hon. and learned Friend has asked the worthwhile nature of a system in which we all believe.

Is the Minister aware that the confidence in the jury system as implied in his answer is fully shared on the Opposition side?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many representations have been made from organisations and individuals, respectively, on the proposals contained in the consultative document on equal opportunities for women and for men ; and if he will make a statement on the general reaction to the proposals.

Comments have been received from some 300 organisations and 1,000 individuals. The great majority favour the principle of the proposed legislation, but divergent views have been expressed about particular aspects of it, notably its scope and the enforcement machinery.

The Home Secretary has covered what was to be my supplementary question. However, are not criticisms devoted to the narrowness of the Bill and the unacceptability or weakness of the enforcement procedure? The Leader of the House gave an undertaking last Thursday that the Bill would be produced within a few weeks. Will the Home Secretary therefore give an undertaking that the long title of the Bill will be so drawn as to enable amendments to be put down to increase and enlarge the scope of the Bill?

I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the final point made by the hon. Gentleman. Regarding criticism as to the narrowness of the Bill, this is a matter of strategy. We have concluded, as did the two Select Committees involved, that on balance it is better to have a hard drive on the most important issues on a relatively narrow front rather than on a wide one. This was also the majority view of the two Select Committees, but it is a matter for debate.

If we are to have a sex discrimination industry, may we have a no-day week?

What is the Home Secretary's present thinking on dealing with anti-discrimination in general, including race discimination, and particularly enforcement procedure?

This has theoretical attractions. Again it is a matter of making a judgment of the practicability. My opinion is that on balance it is more practical and more effective to keep the two separate, but others may take a different view. Whether they may all come together at some future time may be another question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the powers under which the Metropolitan Police obtain access to patients' records kept by doctors and nurses in cases of suspected misuse of drugs.

The commissioner informs me that it is not the practice of the Metropolitan Police to inspect records relating to the treatment of patients except when the doctor concerned permits them to do so in order to check whether the requirements of the law are being observed.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. Is he aware, however, that considerable disquiet has been expressed by the Medical Defence Union and others concerning the circumstances arising from the raid on a Kingston club on 15th December? Is he aware that apparently on that occasion it was suggested that Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act permitted the police to examine confidential medical records, even where it was not alleged that the doctor was in collusion with the police in defeating the law?

I am aware of that case, in which the police acted with a search warrant. I am also aware of two matters in particular. The first is that allegations have been made about the conduct of the police, and these are being investigated in the proper way. The House will agree, I am sure, that it would be wrong for me to say anything further. Secondly, as the hon. Gentleman knows, certain people have been charged and the case is sub judice, which shackles what I can say on the matter at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to make arrangements for Members of Parliament to visit laboratories using live animals in experiments, to which his inspectors have access.

Access to premises registered under the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, which are private property, is a matter for those responsible for them. But if any hon. Member who wishes to make a visit will let me know, I shall see if arrangements can be made.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. May I stress that the important point about such visits is that they should be unheralded?

The visits of the inspectorate are also unheralded. May I stress to my hon. Friend that last May I issued a standing invitation to any hon. Member who wished to make a visit to get in touch with me, but I am still waiting for the first volunteer.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received from members of the public and other interested parties following the publication of his recent report on football pools and lotteries.

A small number of letters have been received from members of the public about various aspects of the Report of the Interdepartmental Working Party on Lotteries. We do not expect to receive the comments of interested organisations until they have had an opportunity of studying the report in detail.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. May I ask him whether he has any plans to encourage the development of lotteries by local authorities for financing particular projects, especially at this time of reduced Government expenditure? May I ask him, secondly, whether he sees it as any part of his function to go along with one of the recommendations in the report and to tell the pools promotion companies the maximum prizes which they should offer?

I ought to make it clear that the report was prepared by an interdepartmental working party and was intended to provide material to stimulate informed discussion. It has been put out for that purpose. It recommended that national lotteries should be limited to charitable, cultural, amenity and sporting purposes, although under its proposals local authorities would be able to take advantage of the higher maximum on small lotteries.

If the idea is to pay out more money on these matters, would it not be better to do it out of taxation rather than out of gambling?

The whole purpose of the working party report is to invite wide public discussion on this issue. It is the view of the working party in its recommendation on the limitation on pool betting that what is likely to happen is a shift in the total amount of betting rather than an increase in it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek powers to change the rules for redistribution of seats under the Second Schedule to the House of Commons (Redistribution of Seats) Act 1949, as amended, so that Boundary Commissions may take into consideration anticipated changes in population.

My right hon. Friend will consider the need for amending legislation in the light of any recommendations made by Mr. Speaker's Conference on Electoral Law.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. Does he not agree that the system needs changing because already the new parliamentary constituency boundaries are out of date and fail totally to take into consideration dramatic changes in the location of population due to new towns, overspill estates and slum clearance?

I cannot comment on the merits of the matters raised in the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question. Rules 4 to 7 of the Redistribution Rules is one of the matters for discussion by Mr. Speaker's Conference, and we must await consideration of it by Mr. Speaker and his Conference.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made on the preparation of new regulations designed to ensure that imported toys satisfy recognised safety standards.

Proposals for more extensive regulations to replace the Toys (Safety) Regulations 1967 have been circulated for comment to local authority associations and to trade, consumer and other interested bodies. The new regulations will be made as soon as possible and will apply, as do the 1967 regulations, to all toys offered for sale in this country, including imported toys.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will he make sure that imported toys conform to regulations? It seems strange that imported toys should continue to be contrary to the standards which the British Standards Institution is trying to get within the toy industry.

I confirm that the regulations will apply to imported toys. The hon. Lady may like to know that these new regulations will cover such matters as electrical safety, the inflamability of pile fabrics, safety requirements for chiming mechanisms, the secure attachment of dolls' eyes and the elimination of sharp points and edges.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many summonses have been issued against drivers for exceeding 50 miles per hour since this limit was established as a fuel-saving measure.

During the period 8th to 31st December 1973 the police in England and Wales reported 4,674 drivers for consideration for prosecution for this offence.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that, although the great majority of drivers are observing the limit, there is an increasing number of thoughtless and possibly selfish drivers who are exceeding it? Does not that indicate that the law is not being enforced with sufficient severity?

Enforcement must be a matter for the individual chief officer of police. I ought to point out that inevitably there is a period of delay between the referral of a matter for consideration for prosecution and the issuing of a summons. It is difficult at this stage, therefore, to say what the position is.