Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Tapsell Excerpts
Tuesday 15th November 2011

(13 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dominic Grieve Portrait The Attorney-General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The law on bribery and corruption has been looked at extensively by the House, and new legislation has been enacted. I believe—and I think that this view is shared across the House—that the legislation is fit for purpose. It has been applied in one case domestically, and no doubt it will be applied in cases concerning global finance, too. As I said in response to the previous question, unfortunately, I cannot comment on individual cases, but I have seen nothing in my routine business meetings with the Serious Fraud Office to make me think that this is an area—I understand that it is of concern to the House—that has in some way been overlooked.

Peter Tapsell Portrait Sir Peter Tapsell (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Following the two questions that I put to the Prime Minister on this subject, will the Attorney-General liaise with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to widen the scope of liability for criminal action against financial institutions, as in the recently passed Dodd-Frank Act in the United States, so that the concept of the presiding mind can be introduced into British law, thus greatly facilitating the prosecution of top bankers who in future behave in a disgraceful way?

Dominic Grieve Portrait The Attorney-General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my right hon. Friend for that. Section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010 already goes some way in the direction of what he suggests. In addition to that, I know that the Law Commission is carrying out research into this area, and I look forward to seeing its conclusions on what changes to the law might be required.