| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Accountability
31. Mr. Flynn: To ask the Attorney-General what proposals he has to improve the accountability of his Department to Parliament. [2922]
The Attorney-General: I am accountable to Parliament for the work of each of my four Departments; namely, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Serious Fraud Office, the Treasury Solicitor's Department and my own secretariat. The Treasury Solicitor's Department is preparing an annual report and accounts. The Crown Prosecution Service, the Serious Fraud Office and the Government Property Lawyers agency will shortly submit to me their statutory annual reports.
Mr. Flynn: I welcome my right hon. and learned Friend, and fellow countryman, to his new responsibility. Will his accountability, and that of his Department, extend to the publication of local reports? Will he assure me that, where appropriate, those reports will be published in his mother tongue of Welsh?
The Attorney-General: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his characteristically kind remarks. Currently, there are seven CPS branches in Wales, each of which published a bilingual report for the year ended 31 December 1996. As a constituency Member of Parliament, I have the report for the West Glamorgan branch. We propose to continue the system of local reports, and they will be in two languages--something that will give pleasure to my hon. Friend.
Mr. John M. Taylor: Given that we are to have 42 chief Crown prosecutors when there are currently 13, can we expect the CPS to publish prosecution figures on each police force area comparable to the Home Office statistics on recorded crime?
The Attorney-General: The details of what will be in each report will be a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions. I can assure the hon. Gentleman, of whose interest I am aware, that the reports to be published in substance will not be less than what is done now. It is very important that the public in each locality should know what is happening, and that is why we have taken the speedy decision to ensure that there is appointed a Crown prosecutor comparable to, and covering an
equivalent-sized area to, a chief constable. The public will know who is the chief constable and who is the Crown prosecutor. I hope that that reassures the hon. Gentleman.Serious Fraud Office
32. Mr. Cohen: To ask the Attorney-General what plans he has to improve the effectiveness of the Serious Fraud Office. [2924]
The Attorney-General: The Serious Fraud Office continues to deter the incidence of serious and complex fraud through effective investigation and prosecution. I will, however, be looking at the scope for further improvements as part of the Government's comprehensive spending review.
Mr. Cohen: I welcome that answer. The Serious Fraud Office has had some fine successes, but also some
expensive failures. Will my right hon. and learned Friend agree to beef up that organisation, with more accountants and more high-finance anti-fraud experts? Will he also consider putting a cap on legal aid, so that the taxpayer does not have to pay such huge funds to accused fraudsters?
The Attorney-General: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I keep in close touch with the SFO. In the period for which figures are available, it had a conviction rate for defendants of 64 per cent. In the last year, nearly 86 per cent. of defendants were convicted.
From my professional experience, I know that many of the cases that the SFO has to tackle are difficult, many are complex and many need substantial investigation beforehand. They are not simple cases. I will, however, do my utmost, with the director of the SFO, to ensure that it continues to have what I regard as a satisfactory record, certainly in recent years.
Business of the House
3.30 pm
Mr. Alastair Goodlad (Eddisbury): May I ask the Leader of the House to give us the business for next week?
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Ann Taylor): The business for next week will be as follows:
Monday 23 June--Second Reading of the Local Government (Contracts) Bill.
Tuesday 24 June--Proceedings on the Plant Varieties Bill.
Motion on the Solicitor General's Salary Order.
Wednesday 25 June--Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Opposition Day [1st allotted day]--Until about 7 pm, there will be a debate on the future of the London Underground, followed by a debate on charging for NHS services. Both debates will arise on Opposition motions.
Thursday 26 June--Until about 7 pm, motion on the Appropriation (No. 2) (Northern Ireland) Order.
Friday 27 June--Debate on sport for all on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Monday 30 June--Motion on the Northern Ireland Act 1974 (Interim Period Extension) Order.
Motion on the Satellite Television Service Regulations.
I hope that, on the following Tuesday, there will be a debate on the review of international development policies, on a motion for the Adjournment. Of course, we have already announced that Wednesday 2 July will be Budget day.
Mr. Goodlad:
I thank the right hon. Lady for giving us the business for next week and provisionally for the week after.
When does the right hon. Lady expect the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges to be set up, since hon. Members share her concerns about allegations against colleagues? Will she also tell us whether she expects next week to be in a position to make progress with the establishment of the other Select Committees?
Can the right hon. Lady confirm that the House will have an early opportunity for a debate on the intergovernmental conference at Amsterdam, as soon it has had an opportunity to study the implications of what was negotiated? Will she tell us the likely timetable of the necessary legislation resulting from the IGC?
Is the right hon. Lady aware that the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Griffiths), held a press conference this morning at which he announced the Government's intentions concerning controls on the use of fireworks? The issue is of concern to many people, and we would have expected a statement on it in the House; it should more properly have been made here than to the press.
Following today's publication of the National Audit Office's report, commissioned by the Chancellor, on the forecasts for public finances, can the Leader of the House confirm that the Chancellor will make a statement to the House next week? If she cannot, and as there is no
indication that there will be time for a debate on that important matter next week, will she confirm that a debate will take place in the early part of the following week, and certainly before the Budget? Can she advise the House whether the previous Administration's policy documents were made available to the National Audit Office?
In view of the considerable speculation about the millennium exhibition project, and reports that, as long ago as mid-January, the Prime Minister gave Mr. Robert Ayling of British Airways an assurance that it would go ahead, might we expect a statement next week on the Government's intentions in that respect?
Mrs. Taylor:
The first question was on the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges; the Government are ready with names for that Committee, and discussions are going ahead through the usual channels. I hope that we shall have all the names we need to table the motion to establish that Committee next week, and that other Select Committees will soon follow.
On the intergovernmental conference and the request for a debate, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made it clear yesterday that legislation may be required, and that, if it is, the timetable for any debate will follow what is required in that respect. We do not at this stage see the need for any other debate; I presume that the Opposition also do not, as they could have had that in their time next Wednesday.
On the statement on fireworks by my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for consumer protection, I should have thought that all hon. Members would have welcomed his attempt to improve firework safety. I do not think that it was necessary to make a statement to the House on the tightening and extending of existing regulations.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |