Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, what records are retained by the Serious Fraud Office concerning decisions not to charge individuals during the LIBOR investigations, and for how long are those records kept.
Answered by Ellie Reeves - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
SFO case records are retained in line with its retention policy. This specifies that case related material should be maintained for at least 7 years following case closure, or the closure of any related appeals. Some material may be held for up to 20 years if it were subsequently deemed as being of long-term interest, before being transferred to the National Archives.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, what procedures were in place during LIBOR investigations to assess the role of senior executives when deciding the scope of criminal inquiries.
Answered by Ellie Reeves - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The SFO’s investigations into Libor were conducted in line with accepted principles for investigating criminal cases. SFO case teams have access to detailed internal guidance to ensure a consistency of approach on its cases and decisions to charge are the responsibility of the Director in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, how many individuals were charged in relation to LIBOR manipulation; and how many investigations concluded without charges, disaggregated by seniority where such information is held.
Answered by Ellie Reeves - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
13 individuals were charged in relation to the Libor investigation. 5 were subsequently found guilty and convicted. The release of the information on investigations concluded without charges would be likely to prejudice the prevention of crime.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, whether her Department has issued any guidance to the Serious Fraud Office following the Supreme Court’s judgment in R (Respondent) v Hayes (Appellant) UKSC/2024/0087.
Answered by Ellie Reeves - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The judgement made in Tom Hayes’ and Carlo Palombo’s appeal to the Supreme Court regarding their convictions for manipulating Libor and Euribor was not based on flaws in the SFO’s procedures and the need for internal guidance, but that the directions given by the judge at their trials were incorrect in law. The court ruled that trial judges had misdirected juries by treating the question of whether a bank submission is "dishonest" as a matter of law, rather than leaving it to the jury.
The defences contention was that was that this removed from the jury an essential consideration of fact which ought to have been for them to determine. In quashing the convictions, the Supreme Court has indicated agreement with that view.
The SFO was not criticised in the judgment and carefully considers judgments of this nature, as part of its ongoing commitment to delivering effective and fair prosecutions
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, whether she plans to review the Serious Fraud Office’s internal procedures following the quashing of Mr Tom Hayes’ conviction by the Supreme Court.
Answered by Ellie Reeves - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The judgement made in Tom Hayes’ and Carlo Palombo’s appeal to the Supreme Court regarding their convictions for manipulating Libor and Euribor was not based on flaws in the SFO’s procedures, but that the directions given by the judge at their trials were incorrect in law. The court ruled that trial judges had misdirected juries by treating the question of whether a bank submission is "dishonest" as a matter of law, rather than leaving it to the jury.
The defence’s contention was that was that this removed from the jury an essential consideration of fact which ought to have been for them to determine. In quashing the convictions, the Supreme Court has indicated agreement with that view.
The SFO was not criticised in the judgment and carefully considers judgments of this nature, as part of its ongoing commitment to delivering effective and fair prosecutions.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what estimate he has made of how much curtailed wind energy could have instead been stored in batteries or other forms of energy storage.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Government has not undertaken an assessment of how much curtailed wind energy could have instead been stored in batteries or other forms of energy storage. The Government has commissioned and published analysis by LCP Delta and Regen on the benefits of Long-Duration Electricity Storage (LDES), including reduced wind curtailment, which has informed policy to encourage storage deployment including the LDES Cap and Floor.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what discussions he has had with Ofgem on wind farms and the practice of curtailment, in the context of the current price of electricity.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The current extent of grid constraints reflects years of underinvestment, with new network infrastructure development having lagged the expansion of new generation.
That’s why this Government is delivering the biggest upgrade in Great Britain’s electricity network in decades.
Alongside this, in April the Government set out it’s Reformed National Pricing Delivery plan, which outlines a number of measures the Government is taking to improve system efficiency and reduce the costs associated with network constraints. We are working closely with Ofgem and NESO to deliver these actions.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether he has reviewed curtailment policy in the context of the conflict in the Middle East.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The current extent of grid constraints reflects years of underinvestment, with new network infrastructure development having lagged the expansion of new generation.
That’s why this Government is delivering the biggest upgrade in Great Britain’s electricity network in decades.
Alongside this, in April the Government set out it’s Reformed National Pricing Delivery plan, which outlines a number of measures the Government is taking to improve system efficiency and reduce the costs associated with network constraints. We are working closely with Ofgem and NESO to deliver these actions.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, how much was paid to wind farm operators for constraint and curtailment payments in 2025 and 2026 so far; and what steps he is taking to reduce this figure.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The costs associated with network curtailment and other balancing actions are passed on to consumers in electricity bills.
As set out in the Reformed National Pricing (RNP) Delivery Plan, wind generators were paid £370 million in 2024/2025 to reduce generation their generation in order to support balancing of the network. Annual balancing costs for 2025/26 will be published in due course by NESO.
The Government is taking forward work through the Reformed National Pricing (RNP) programme to reduce constraint costs and improve consumer outcomes, as outlined in the Reformed National Pricing Delivery Plan.
Asked by: Iqbal Mohamed (Independent - Dewsbury and Batley)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, if he will make an estimate of the amount consumers paid through electricity bills for wind farm curtailment in the last 12 months.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The costs associated with network curtailment and other balancing actions are passed on to consumers in electricity bills.
As set out in the Reformed National Pricing (RNP) Delivery Plan, wind generators were paid £370 million in 2024/2025 to reduce generation their generation in order to support balancing of the network. Annual balancing costs for 2025/26 will be published in due course by NESO.
The Government is taking forward work through the Reformed National Pricing (RNP) programme to reduce constraint costs and improve consumer outcomes, as outlined in the Reformed National Pricing Delivery Plan.