Oral Answers to Questions

Dominic Grieve Excerpts

Tuesday 1st March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Hugh Bayley (York Central) (Lab)]

2. What the policy of the Serious Fraud Office is on seeking costs from those convicted as a result of a prosecution brought by the office.

[The Attorney-General (Mr Dominic Grieve)]

The SFO considers costs in all criminal proceedings where a conviction is secured.

[Hugh Bayley]

I am extremely pleased about the change of policy in the case of the British Aerospace contract in Tanzania, for which costs were sought and paid. Will the Attorney-General make sure that costs are always sought where there is a conviction? At a time of very tight public expenditure, it is important for the SFO to get income from wherever it can in order to investigate and prosecute such cases.

[The Attorney-General]

I entirely agree that costs should normally be sought. Of course there may be instances where that is simply not appropriate, such as where the defendant is destitute or penniless and it is clear that a cost order will serve no purpose—and, indeed, a court is unlikely to make one. Subject to that, however, it is the normal policy that where a conviction is secured, costs are sought.

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab)]

3. What plans the Crown Prosecution Service has to improve the effectiveness of prosecution policy in human trafficking cases.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con)]

5. If he will place in the Library a copy of the speech he made to Politeia on 14 February 2011.

[The Attorney-General (Mr Dominic Grieve)]

I did not make a formal speech during the Politeia event, so any comments I made were in response to points raised during a seminar. I therefore regret that I do not have any written record that can be placed in the Library.

[Tony Baldry]

The Attorney-General is reported as having said the following at the Politeia seminar:

“The court”—

the European Court of Human Rights—

“doesn’t have the last word. It only has the last word so far as parliament has decided that it should. We could, if we wanted to, undo that—I think we should always bear that in mind—and actually undo it without some of the consequences we have over the European Union.”

Did he say that? If so, what does it mean?

[The Attorney-General]

The question arose in the context of parliamentary sovereignty. What I said to the seminar was what I also said to this House on the previous Thursday, which was that the operation of the European convention on human rights and the jurisdiction of the Court are based on the UK having signed up to the convention in the late 1940s and having ratified it through Parliament, with Parliament thereby accepting the jurisdiction of the Court. It is legally open to Parliament to enact primary legislation or otherwise to withdraw from the convention if it wished to do so and if the Government wished that through Parliament. That was the point that I was making; I was simply trying to explain the legal framework under which parliamentary sovereignty works in this context. I would add that any withdrawal would not come without costs or consequences, and it is not Government policy to withdraw.

[Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con)]

6. What steps he is taking to ensure better co-ordination between the Crown Prosecution Service and police forces.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Attorney-General (Mr Dominic Grieve)]

The Crown Prosecution Service is committed to ensuring that the provision of services by witness care units is protected. Future funding for witness care units will still be made from the CPS baseline budget along with the commitment that also comes from the Ministry of Justice. Consequently, the outcome of the comprehensive spending review will not have an adverse effect on the provision of those services.

[Mr Clarke]

I thank the Attorney-General for his reply. Has he made representations to the Home Secretary to ensure that the police input into funding, which is extremely important, continues in respect of witness care units?

[The Attorney-General]

It is my experience, from the importance that the Home Secretary attaches to ensuring that witnesses and victims are properly cared for, that she gives this matter considerable priority. I have not been made aware of anything that suggests that my Department’s work will be adversely affected in this area by anything being done by the police, but I will certainly raise the matter with my right hon. Friend. If she or I can provide the right hon. Gentleman with some reassurance, I am sure we will be happy to do so.

The hon. Member for South West Devon, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, was asked—