House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 Mar 1993

Column 12

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Barristers (Payments)

24. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Attorney-General what was the highest sum paid to a barrister in respect of (a) a prosecuting brief, (b) daily refreshers and (c) the highest combined total paid for a case in (i) criminal cases and (ii) civil cases in the past year ; and if he will make a statement.

The Solicitor-General (Sir Derek Spencer) : The specific answers to my hon. Friend's questions are, for criminal cases--(a) £329,000 ; (b) £750 ; (c) £545,678 ; and for civil cases £82,600.

High fees of that nature are paid only in a few very heavy and complex cases spread over a number of years. The average fee for a case in the Crown court paid by the Crown prosecution service in the year 1991-92 was £366.

Mr. Greenway : Is not my hon. and learned Friend concerned that tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money has been wasted on collapsed fraud and other trials? Will he urgently set up an inquiry so that we may learn the lessons of what went wrong in each case and ensure that there is no repetition?

The Solicitor-General : That money has not been wasted. By definition, the function of a trial is to test the evidence. In the Plasser case, the magistrates heard the evidence and committed for trial ; the judge heard the evidence and ruled that there was no case to answer. That is the function of a criminal trial.

Mr. Alex Carlile : Does the hon. and learned Gentleman recognise that in the payment of ordinary fees in heavyish cases, there remains great concern at the Bar because the Government are not paying their debts to lawyers in reasonable time? Will he take steps to ensure that the central taxing units meet their targets?

The Solicitor-General : I can only advise the hon. and learned Gentleman to get a better clerk. In his next case, he will be entitled to an interim payment after 20 days. When the case is concluded, his clerk can put in a fee note for payment on account--long before it ever gets to the central taxation unit, as I know from my own experience.

Mr. Burns : Given the escalating costs of justice and the importance of everyone having access to the law to redress their problems, should not the Government urgently consider introducing a no win-no fee voluntary system of justice?

The Solicitor-General : My hon. Friend's point is already under consideration. However, life in the Crown court is rather different from what some suggest. The standard fee for a guilty plea is £113. The standard brief fee for a case that lasts up to three days, including preparation and the first day, is £217, with a refresher of £150 per day. If the case lasts three days, that means a payment of £517 for work spread over at least four days.

Maastricht Treaty

25. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Attorney-General what further advice he has to give on the Maastricht treaty in respect of parliamentary amendments.

Column 13

The Attorney-General (Sir Nicholas Lyell) : I set out in my written answer to the right hon. Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) on 22 February the principles applicable to amendments to the European Communities (Amendment) Bill. I shall advise the House on specific issues as necessary.

Mr. Skinner : Why does not the Attorney-General admit that he came up with that advice the other day because a political shift had taken place in the House? I ask the Attorney-General to be prepared. Because of the Cabinet split and two Cabinet Ministers meeting with the prince of darkness, the iron lady and her guru, the right hon. and learned Gentleman ought to have other advice ready. If the Prime Minister gets the sack and the other lot take over, the right hon. and learned Gentleman better have a separate piece of legal advice, because the one that he has will not be good enough.

The Attorney-General : That may be the way that legal advice is given in the principality where the hon. Gentleman is prince but in the world where you rule, Madam Speaker, and in this country, legal advice is given independently and dispassionately.

Mr. John Marshall : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it is strange that the Leader of the Opposition says that he is in favour of the Maastricht treaty but then does his damnedest to frustrate the Bill's passage through the House?

The Attorney-General : I give legal advice to the House, so I shall not comment--but I well understand my hon. Friend's point.

Mr. Fraser : I am sure that the Attorney-General agrees with the constitutional proposition that the Government derive their authority from Parliament, not the other way around. Having advised the House that the Government can treat the passage of amendment No. 27 with impunity, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman advise the House whether, if it wants to adopt the social chapter, it would effectively be able to do so by adopting amendment No. 443 or some other amendment? Does not the Attorney- General have a duty to advise the House how it may properly express its will?

The Attorney-General : I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman invites me to comment on an amendment on which the Chairman of Ways and Means has not yet taken a decision, and which is not yet even before the Committee.

Government Departments

26. Mr. Gareth Wardell : To ask the Attorney-General if he will list his statutory powers to take legal action against Government Departments for breaches of the law.

The Attorney-General : My powers to take action for breaches of the law, whether ex officio or at the relation of a citizen, are founded in common law.

Mr. Wardell : Given that the Attorney-General's authority is derived from common law, will he explain why he has never permitted a citizen of this country to take civil action in the courts against a Minister or Government Department, and why he is unwilling to explain his reasons for such a refusal?

Column 14

The Attorney-General : I am not sure that the premise of the hon. Gentleman's question is right. When I lend my name in a relator action to a citizen in order to bring proceedings--whomsoever they are against--I review the matter dispassionately and carefully, in accordance with the law and the strength of the case that the citizen puts before me.

Fraud

27. Mr. Flynn : To ask the Attorney-General what proposals he has to reduce the level of crimes of fraud.

The Solicitor-General : The Serious Fraud Office and the fraud investigation group of the Crown prosecution service are designed to deter the incidence of serious fraud by providing for effective investigation and prosecution.

Mr. Flynn : As the Solicitor-General is aware, the law mercilessly pursues small earners for fraud offences involving payment of various taxes through the courts. How will the hon. and learned Gentleman ensure that those having incomes of £150,000 a year who pay little or no tax are brought to book? Does he think that the case of Mr. John Birt is one of tax evasion, fraud, or theft?

The Solicitor-General : That matter is for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Serious Fraud Office has a budget of £21 million, 133 permanent staff, and 90 police attached to it. It is testimony of our determination to get to the bottom of white collar fraud.

Mr. Merchant : Can my hon. and learned Friend give an assurance that the Serious Fraud Office has the expertise to deal with all the ramifications of recent allegations of local government corruption?

The Solicitor-General : I can assure my hon. Friend of that. If fraud in local government is so widespread that it cannot be dealt with adequately by the Serious Fraud Office, no doubt the fraud investigation group of the Crown prosecution service can be called in. I assure my hon. Friend that, one way or another, the allegations will be thoroughly investigated and that if local government needs to be cleaned up, we shall ensure that it is cleaned up.

Sentences (Increase)

28. Mr. Hawkins : To ask the Attorney-General how many cases have been put forward to the Court of Appeal for consideration for a possible increase in sentence as a result of his intervention during 1992.

The Attorney-General : In 1992, the Law Officers sought leave to refer 41 cases to the Court of Appeal, including four to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland. Three were later withdrawn in the light of further information. Twenty-one of those cases have been determined to date, in 19 of which the original sentence has been increased.

Mr. Hawkins : I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for his answer.

My constituents, and people throughout the country, consider the right of appeal for the prosecution one of the most valuable pieces of legislation that the Government have introduced. There are still far too many cases in which unreasonably lenient sentences are imposed. May I urge my right hon. and learned Friend to continue to

Column 15

consider exercising the power that the Government have now rightly given him whenever there is a public outcry, as there has been in response to a number of recent cases?

The Attorney-General : I agree with my hon. Friend. Parliament was very wise to institute that power. In an effective criminal justice system it is important not only to be able to reduce over-severe sentences, but-- if the Court of Appeal thinks it right--to be able to increase unduly lenient sentences. Similarly, it is important not only for the innocent not to be convincted, but for the system to be capable of bringing the guilty to justice.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

Aid (United Nations Target)

34. Mr. Nigel Griffiths : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further representations he has received regarding the desirability of the United Kingdom Government's achieving the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent. gross national product for overseas aid.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Mark Lennox-Boyd) : We continue to receiverepresentations from hon. Members and others.

Mr. Griffiths : Why does not the Minister listen to those representations--representations which might have prevented the disgraceful position in which he has placed the country, which has dropped to 13th in the league of aid-giving countries per head of population? Why does he not listen to the representations of Scottish Education and Action for Development, the Scottish Churches Council, Oxfam and all the other organisations and citizens in this country who are keen to ensure that the Government play their part in helping the third world--a part they are manifestly failing to play at present?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The hon. Gentleman should listen to some of the facts. Expenditure figures relating to the last year for which such figures are available show an increase of 3 per cent. on the year before in real terms, and expenditure in the coming year is to increase by 1 per cent. in real terms on last year's expenditure. At a time of great economic stringency, that is indeed success for the ODA budget.

Mr. Wells : Is it not a fact that our aid programme is one of the best-focused on poverty? In a tough year for expenditure, we have increased the budget for overseas development to £1.9 billion. Does not that show the generosity of people in this country, working with the non- governmental organisations, which also contribute a significant amount to the third world?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Yes. At a time of difficulty, we have done extremely well for the ODA budget. It is also true that there are considerable contributions from other quarters. United Kingdom direct investment overseas is half the European Community total ; the 1991 estimate was £3,000 million.

Mr. Meacher : How can the Minister justify cutting the aid budget as a proportion of gross national product by almost half over the past 13 years, and planning further substantial real cuts in two of the next three years, when

Column 16

over the past four years his Government have given British banks £2.25 billion--50 per cent. more than the ODA's total annual aid budget--in tax reliefs against possible defaults on third world loans? In fact, there have been no defaults, and not a penny of that money has been used to defray the debts of some of the world's poorest nations.

Ministers like to say--as this Minister does--that they concentrate on the poorest. Since when have Barclays and the National Westminster bank been in that category? If there is now great pressure on public expenditure, would it not be better for the banks, rather than some of the poorest nations on earth, to feel the draught?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The hon. Gentleman asks several questions. Let us deal with the public expenditure survey for the next three years. At a time of great economic stringency, if he takes all forms of external assistance, he will find an increase of 10 per cent. in cash terms and 1 per cent. in real terms. [Interruption.] It is the ODA's budget. If the hon. Gentleman were to penalise the banks' accounting procedures for lending to the third world. It would stop them lending to the third world.

Mr. Bates : Does my hon. Friend agree that to the recipients of aid the quality of aid is as important as its quantity? Will he compare the quality of British aid with that of other donor countries?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The quality of aid certainly is important, but the enormous pressure on other aid programmes must be recognised. For example, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the United States and Italy have all announced plans to cut their aid budgets--in some cases substantially.

Overseas Aid

35. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the latest estimates for overseas aid ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer set out the Government's spending plans for 1993-94 to 1995-96, including those for overseas aid, in his autumn statement on 12 November last year.

Mr. Skinner : In view of the overseas aid figures that we have just heard and the reduction in aid to third-world countries, does not the Minister feel a little ashamed when he compares the fact that in 1991 the top four clearing banks set aside £720 million, yet third-world countries had no debts written off? Are not the Government running a strange society when the Chancellor of the Exchequer can write off £4,700 and the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food can have £20, 000 worth of assets added to his property, whereas little kids in South Africa and elsewhere with matchstick legs get hardly anything from this Government? If debts are going to be written off for banks and others, they should be written off for poor countries in the third world.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The hon. Member characteristically ignores many of the facts and makes a load of allegations that are quite unsubstantiated. Britain led the world in debt relief under the Trinidad terms initiated by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, from which 14 countries have benefited, 11 of which were the poorest countries in Africa. Many of the private banks have written off debts,

Column 17

but the hon. Member, once again, seeks to penalise the banks by withdrawing tax relief, which would stop them lending to the third world.

Miss Emma Nicholson : In the light of Shyam Bathia's article in the Observer yesterday, which highlighted the tragic plight of those in the marshes of Iraq, will the Minister join me in thanking the ODA and the Foreign Office for their expertise in monitoring much more accurately than any other nation what was happening in the area? That has allowed organisations such as the Amar appeal to spend the only bilateral aid that is going into the marshes from the west, which comes from the Government and for which we are most truly grateful?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Yes, I am delighted to support my hon. Friend. I can say from my knowledge in other fields that the Government's contribution to help with all forms of humanitarian assistance in Iraq in the past two years amounts to £56 million.

Mr. Spearing : The Minister properly emphasises the quality of aid, which depends on the freedom and choice of the Government to determine their own aid programme. Does he agree that under the treaty of European union there is some compulsion to co-ordinate aid policy? Would not that, to some extent at least, constrict the choices that are open to the Government?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The hon. Gentleman and I, and others, debated that only last week.

Mr. Spearing : I did not.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : The previous right hon. Member for South Down claimed many times to be participating in debates by listening. The hon. Member knows that the requirement in the treaty of Maastricht only enshrines practice heretofore. All members of the European Community will co-ordinate their aid policies, but that co-ordination does not undermine the right of each country to maintain its own bilateral aid programme.

Population Policies

36. Mr. Ottaway : To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the percentage of the overseas aid budget allocated to population policies.

Column 18

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Some £26.5 million, or 1.5 per cent. of the aid programme, was spent on direct support for population programmes in 1991.

Mr. Ottaway : I thank my hon Friend for that answer and congratulate him on the story so far, but, in view of the growing concern about population, will he support the proposal that the G7 countries allocate at least 4 per cent. of their aid programmes to population policies? Can he confirm that his Department will be leading for the Government in the run- up to the United Nations conference in Cairo next year?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : I can confirm that the Overseas Development Administration will be leading for the Government at the Cairo conference. I am afraid that I cannot agree with my hon. Friend on the question of a target for population matters in the aid programme, although I congratulate him on his interest and on pressing the point. We are not happy with financial targets, but the Government are happy and the Department is keen to have targets for the number of countries and for the projects that we can initiate in the next two years. We hope to have 15 projects over two years and to double the number of countries involved.

Sir David Steel : In view of the alarming forecast given at the Rio summit of the trends in world population growth and their effect on the environment, should not these policies have a much higher priority in the Government's budget at home and abroad?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd : Of course, rapid population growth of the type to which the right hon. Gentleman refers will cause environmental problems, but the links between population growth and the environment are complex. The ODA is funding research to enhance understanding of that subject.

Mr. Winnick : On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker : We have a statement. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I can hear his point of order after that.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page