| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Serious Fraud Office
27. Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South): How often he meets the Director of the Serious Fraud Office to discuss the work of the office. [74108]
The Solicitor-General (Mr. Ross Cranston): The Attorney-General and I meet the Director of the Serious Fraud Office regularly. We also meet on an ad hoc basis when circumstances determine.
Mr. Chapman: Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that, by the nature of things, the Serious Fraud Office develops specialist, esoteric but sophisticated skills? Does he also agree that those are not always shared with the police? Does that suggest that more work and more cases should be handled by the SFO?
The Solicitor-General: My hon. Friend will know that, as a result of the comprehensive spending review, £5.6 million extra has been allocated to the SFO for the next three years. The SFO works with the police; it depends on the police referring cases. The two work together; police officers work with the SFO. The SFO deals with complex and multi-disciplinary fraud, and is doing so successfully. Its conviction rate has risen considerably.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): Can the hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House now, or be good enough to inform me of in writing later, the average length of time between the start of an investigation by the Serious Fraud office and a decision to prosecute? Do the Government plan to improve targets to achieve better service?
The Solicitor-General: The hon. Gentleman will be very pleased to know that, as a result of the comprehensive spending review agreement between the SFO and the Government, the SFO has determined to reduce average time from accepting a case and completing investigations to 17.5 months, and to reduce to 16 months the average length of prosecution between transfer and committal on one hand and verdict on the other.
William Beausire
28. Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North): When he expects to authorise a private prosecution for the death of William Beausire. [74109]
The Attorney-General: Solicitors acting for a number of individuals applied for my consent to prosecute Augusto Pinochet for offences in relation to William Beausire. As my hon. Friend knows, he wrote to me on 27 January regarding the matter. I replied on 1 February that I was then hoping to reach a decision soon, and that the solicitors would be advised. By my letter dated 11 February 1999, the solicitors were advised that I had decided not to grant my consent. The basis of that decision is that the relevant legislation is not retrospective and the material supplied by the solicitors in support of the application provided insufficient admissible evidence to justify a prosecution.
Mr. Corbyn: Does the Attorney-General accept that many of us are very disappointed by his answer and by the letter that he sent to Bindmans, which is acting on behalf of the Beausire family? Is he aware that there is a mountain of evidence that William Beausire, who was last seen at Buenos Aires airport in 1974 and then in prison in Chile a year later, was abducted from Buenos Aires in 1974, and that Michael Townley, who was convicted of the assassination of Orlando Letelier, has admitted his part in the abduction?
Is the Attorney-General aware that in 1977, the British embassy sent a memo to the then Foreign Secretary expressing its belief that the Chilean intelligence service, known as the DINA, was indeed responsible for the murder of William Beausire? Will the Attorney-General look again at that outrageous occurrence in which a British citizen was abducted from one country to another, tortured and murdered, yet we cannot prosecute somebody under national or international law for crimes against humanity, hostage taking and torture in the case of William Beausire? Will the Attorney-General go through the mountain of evidence that exists, look at the many Hansard references on the case, going back more than 20 years, and find that we can at least allow members of the family to try their day in court to hold responsible the people who murdered their brother?
The Attorney-General:
I know the concern that my hon. Friend feels about the matter. May I assure him that I consider personally all the applications--more than five--as regards prosecuting in this matter. I have the
May I say--I guard my words very carefully--that I do not want to go too deep into the matter, which the House will understand? Mr. Beausire, we are told, was arrested in 1974. I state without comment that an offence under
the provisions on torture in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 came into effect and applied only after September 1988, and an offence regarding hostage taking, only after November 1982. The legislation is not retrospective.
If any additional evidence comes before me, I will look at it. I am sure the House will accept from me that I will look at it with the same care and attention as I have given to all the other applications.
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire):
Will the Leader of the House give the House the business for next week?
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett):
The business for next week will be as follows:
Monday 15 March--Conclusion of the Budget debate.
Tuesday 16 March--Third Reading of the House of Lords Bill.
Motion on the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 (Continuance) Order.
Wednesday 17 March--Until 12.30 pm, debate on the second report from the Environmental Audit Committee on the greening government initiative, followed by a debate on the sixth report from the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee on the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, followed by debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Remaining stages of the Tax Credits Bill.
Thursday 18 March--Opposition day [7th allotted day].
Until about 4 o'clock there will be a debate entitled "reductions in the strength of the police" followed by a debate that the Opposition wish to call "The Government's failed roads policy". Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.
At 7 o'clock the House will be asked to agree the spring supplementary estimates, excess votes and defence votes A.
Friday 19 March--Private Members' Bills.
The provisional business for the following week will be as follows:
Monday 22 March--Opposition day [8th allotted day].
There will be a debate on a motion in the name of the Liberal Democrats, subject to be announced.
Proceedings on the Consolidated Fund (No.2) Bill.
Tuesday 23 March--Second Reading of the Access to Justice Bill [Lords].
Wednesday 24 March--Until 2 o'clock there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Remaining stages of the Local Government Bill.
Thursday 25 March--There will be a debate on the armed forces on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Friday 26 March--Private Members' Bills.
The House will also wish to be reminded that on Wednesday 17 March there will be a debate on the welfare of laying hens in European Standing Committee A, and that on Wednesday 24 March, there will be a debate on deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, also in European Standing Committee A. Details of the relevant documents will be given in the Official Report.
[Wednesday 17 March:
European Standing Committee A--Relevant European Union document: 6985/98, Welfare of Laying Hens; Relevant European Scrutiny Committee Reports: HC 34-iv, and HC 34 xii (1998-99); Relevant European Legislation Committee Report: HC 155-xxviii (1997-98).
Wednesday 24 March 1999:
European Standing Committee A--Relevant European Union document: 6378/98, Deliberate Release into the Environment of Genetically Modified Organisms. Relevant European Scrutiny Committee Report: HC 34 iii (1998-99) Relevant European Legislation Committee Report: HC 155-xxvi (1997-98).]
The House may also wish to know that, subject to the progress of business, it is proposed that the House will rise for the Easter recess at the end of business on Wednesday 31 March and return on Tuesday 13 April, which will be a full sitting day.
Sir George Young:
The House is grateful for being informed of next week's business, for the indication of the business for the following week and, indeed, for the dates of the Easter recess.
The Leader of the House has announced a debate on the armed forces. Can she confirm that, after discussions through the usual channels, we are moving away from three debates--one on each armed service--to a better structure, with debates on equipment, policy and personnel? Will she consider holding the debate on personnel on Thursday week?
Following a previous exchange at business questions, will the right hon. Lady find time for a debate and a vote on public expenditure? Having moved away from a unified Budget, with debates and votes on expenditure, the Government have so far not provided Parliament with adequate time for debates that are central to our role of voting supply. Can the right hon. Lady put that right?
In his Budget statement, the Chancellor trailed a number of further statements by his Cabinet colleagues. Will any of those be oral statements next week?
The right hon. Lady has not announced any debates in the next two weeks on recent statements and publications that need debating: the Macpherson report, the national changeover plan, the White Paper on Lords reform and the report of the royal commission on long-term care of the elderly. What plans has she to tackle that growing backlog?
May we also have a statement from the Deputy Prime Minister on council tax increases?
12.32 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |