Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Garnier Excerpts

Tuesday 10th July 2012 Commons Chamber

[Yvonne Fovargue (Makerfield) (Lab)]

4. How many successful prosecutions for fraud were brought by the Serious Fraud Office in 2011.

[The Solicitor-General (Mr Edward Garnier)]

Owing to their complexity, SFO cases rarely conclude in the same year in which the prosecution, still less the investigation, begins. In 2011, the SFO concluded 14 fraud cases and 28 defendants were convicted; a further seven bribery cases were brought to a successful conclusion.

[Yvonne Fovargue]

With the SFO budget being cut by 25% over the course of this Parliament, what advantages does the Solicitor-General think the introduction of deferred prosecution agreements will bring, apart from plugging the financial hole in fraud investigations through plea bargains with corporate perpetrators?

[The Solicitor-General]

Deferred prosecution agreements bring with them self-evident advantages: they will ensure that companies are brought to justice, through confession, through whistleblowing or through investigation; they will bring speed, as a resolution in these matters will be brought forward much more quickly—the average SFO case takes about three and a half years and costs about £1.5 million; they will bring compensation to victims; they will avoid collateral damage to innocent parties; and they will provide an additional weapon in the prosecutor’s armoury. I hope that the hon. Lady would welcome that.

[Margot James (Stourbridge) (Con)]

5. What assessment he has made of the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service inspectorate to review the handling of disclosure in complex cases; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Bow) (Lab)]

9. What progress he has made on introducing fast-tracked prosecutions during the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics.

[The Solicitor-General (Mr Edward Garnier)]

The arrangements for fast-track prosecutions during the Olympics and Paralympics are in place and they have been agreed by the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service, the police and representatives of defence lawyers in London. Olympic offences originating from the hon. Lady’s part of London will be dealt with at Thames magistrates court and Snaresbrook Crown court, with priority cases being dealt with at Highbury Corner magistrate’s court.

[Rushanara Ali]

The Crown Prosecution Service has been quoted by the media as saying that offences classified as “Olympic offences” will be fast-tracked through the courts during the Olympic and Paralympic games. Will the Solicitor-General explain what is meant by an “Olympic offence”, and does he think that it is right that Crown and magistrates courts near Olympic venues or traffic hubs should close or reduce their sittings during the games?

[The Solicitor-General]

I think the media are quoting a letter shown to them by the shadow Attorney-General—

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

I have not seen it.

[The Solicitor-General]

The hon. Lady has not seen it either. We are both in the dark, that is wonderful—[Interruption.] The shadow Attorney-General does not know anything, apparently. Let me enlighten her—[Interruption.] She is obviously in a hurry to learn.

The criminal justice system Olympics working group has adopted the following definition of an Olympic offence:

“any offence…committed and charged in the period 1st July to 30th September 2012, and is…stated by any Court to be directly connected to the 2012 Olympic or Paralympics Games”.

It is a definition of a type of crime, not a new offence.

[The Solicitor-General]

I am sorry, but I found it quite difficult to hear my right hon. Friend, but in so far as I heard his question, the courts will be manned by all appropriate judges. At the Crown court, clearly there will be Crown court judges; in magistrates courts, district judges will be deployed and, where appropriate, justices of the peace will sit in banks of three.