§ Andrew Mackinlay
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) consequent upon the withdrawal of the members of the Metropolitan Police panel formed to consider the case of John Redgrave, what consultation was extended to John Redgrave's counsel prior to a new date for the hearing being scheduled; 
(2) if he will require the Commissioner of Metropolitan Police to find a date for the disciplinary hearing of John Redgrave (a) which is convenient for all parties and (b) where he can be represented by his nominated counsel; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) if the Counsel for John Redgrave at his disciplinary hearing indicated his satisfaction with the composition of the disciplinary panel membership prior to the withdrawal of two officers on the panel; and if he will make a statement. 
(4) why trial members of the Metropolitan Police disciplinary board scheduled to hear the case of John Redgrave withdrew their notices; what notice of their withdrawal was given to John Redgrave's counsel; and if he will make a statement; 
(5) when (a) John Redgrave and (b) his Counsel were advised of the need to reschedule the date of John Redgrave's disciplinary hearing before the Metropolitan Police; when they were advised of the revised date for the hearing; and what steps were taken to seek a mutually agreed date between all parties. 
§ Mr. Denham
[holding answer 27 February 2003]: The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis informs me that dates for prospective hearings were set after full consultation with Counsel for DI Redgrave.
The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis informs me that two of the Discipline Board members stood down on Tuesday 11 February following submissions of possible lack of impartiality by defence Counsel acting on behalf of the other officer facing disciplinary proceedings. I am further informed that DI Redgrave's Counsel was present throughout these proceedings.1080W
The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis informs me that during the course of the submissions that preceded two of the Discipline Board members standing down Counsel for DI Redgrave stated that he was, "…decidedly neutral".
The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis informs me that contact with DI Redgrave and his Counsel was made normally through DI Redgrave's solicitors. To that end, solicitors representing DI Redgrave were initially contacted by telephone at lunchtime on the day that members of the Discipline Board withdrew and were informed that efforts were being made to convene a new Board. DI Redgrave's solicitors were further contacted by telephone in an attempt to re-convene the hearing within the originally scheduled period of four weeks, which had been set aside for the hearing. However, when that proved not possible, on 20 February 2003, letters were faxed to solicitors acting on behalf of DI Redgrave and the other officer involved in the proceedings urgently seeking available dates for a hearing, between that date and 1 June 2003.
Matters related to the conduct of disciplinary proceedings are the responsibility of chief officers. The Secretary of State has no authority to intervene in such matters.