Dominic Grieve and Harriet Harman on the Damian Green arrest

6.30pm update:

The Telegraph reports that Damian Green has been instructing Michael Caplan QC, the eminent solicitor who famously represented General Pinochet, when the former Chilean dictator was arrested on a Spanish warrant while visiting London for medical treatment in 1998.

---

Sky News has just interviewed shadow home secretary, Dominic Grieve, and Harriet Harman, the leader of the House of Commons, on the issue of Damian Green's arrest.

Dominic Grieve was pretty scathing about the interview given earlier this morning by his opposite number, Jacqui Smith. He said the most important question needing an answer was what she knew and why she acted in the way that she did. Significantly, he said that from his interpretation of her answers (or lack thereof) on the Andrew Marr show, "I think she knew there was an MP involved in this investigation and she decided to simply sit back on her hands," meaning that she therefore has a great deal for which to answer to Parlaiment.

He added that it was wrong of her to insinuate that there were national security issues at stake in this investigation and that his view was that the grounds for arresting Damian Green and searching his homes an offices were "flimsy and trivial".

Interviewed shortly beforehand on Sky News, Hariet Harman sought to give an assurance that she appreciated the "big constitutional principle" involved over the arrest of an MP in these circumstances. "As Leader of the House, I am in no doubt how deeply MPs feel about it... MPs should be able to get on with their job without the interference of the law," she said.

But she refused to condemn the actions of anyone involved and after revealing that she had disucssed the matter with the Speaker, she refused also to disclose the contents of that conversation. She did say, however, that the Speaker "might well want to review the processes by which authorisation is given to search the Palace of Westminster."

Comments

[Eveleigh Moore-Dutton]

There is the law and then there is the use of judgement in implementing law enforcement. Did you know that it is against the law for a woman to eat chocolate on a public conveyance? It is also a theft to keep money found in the street but these are rules which Mr Plod very sensibly does not pursue with vigour - he uses his discretion.
If we conclude that the police have some discretion about the way in which they go about their business then they had some discretion about the effectiveness or wisdom of jumping all over an MP.

...unless they were leant on ... just a little bit?

[Sally Roberts]

"Did you know that it is against the law for a woman to eat chocolate on a public conveyance?"

HELP! They're coming to get me! :-(

Will somebody please bring me a cake in prison with a file in it?

[Norm Brainer]

So you think that the police should have bee physically and illegally prevented in pursuing a lawful investigation? I'm not saying that you are wrong, I merely want you to acknowledge it.

Yes.

Until such a time as parliament can decide whether or not to let them in... Speaker having not the eyes nor ears and all that.

..and then I would say unless they had an exceptionally good reason they should decide not to let them in to protect their constituents.

MPs aren't above the law, but they should be expected to break it if necessary for the good of the people, the same as any person would break the law if they believed it right to do so.

[Sally Roberts]

There is a rather disturbing piece on The Mail Online which hints that the Police may be planning "further arrests". It looks as though this may turn into a witch hunt.

[Sally Roberts]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1090649/LATEST-More-arrests-possible-Straw-joins-Cabinet-attack-Jacqui-Smith-Tory-MP-leaks-fiasco.html