Previous Section Index Home Page

17 July 2008 : Column 551W—continued


Section 13 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 gives the Commission power to make grants to other bodies to promote public awareness. I am informed that since 2002 the Commission has awarded grants to organisations for projects that raise
17 July 2008 : Column 552W
awareness of the democratic process, including but not limited to promoting voter registration. The following table shows the total grant funding awarded to non-governmental organisations in each year:

£

2002-03

317,808

2003-04

188,339

2004-05

218,335

2005-06

393,734

2006-07

2,308,406

2007-08

1,177,477


The grants scheme is now closed to new applications and all funded projects will end by 31 March 2010.

Chris Ruane: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission how much the Electoral Commission spent on voter registration advertising in each of the last five years; and what assessment the Commission has made of the effectiveness of that advertising in increasing voter registration. [218989]

Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that its advertising campaigns both encourage voter registration and provide information about how to take part in elections, including different methods of voting and voting systems. The Commission is therefore not able to separate out its expenditure on voter registration advertising from its wider voter information advertising.

The following table shows the total expenditure on all such advertising in each of the past four years for which the relevant financial records are readily available. Equivalent information for earlier years could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

£

2004-05

4,937,021

2005-06

5,438,551

2006-07

4,412,197

2007-08

4,115,661


A report to the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission by the Comptroller and Auditor General, published in 2006 and entitled “Is the Public Aware of Democracy?” concluded that the Commission had used its resources in raising public awareness in general effectively, when judged by measures such as recall rates and other industry measures for its advertising, and that there appeared to have been an overall positive effect on voter registration.

Solicitor-General

Departmental Pay

Mr. O'Hara: To ask the Solicitor-General what the hourly charging rates of staff of the Treasury Solicitor’s Department were in (a) 2005-06, (b) 2006-07 and (c) 2007-08. [217289]

The Solicitor-General: For those staff of the Treasury Solicitor’s Department who are charged for on an hourly rate, the figures were:


17 July 2008 : Column 553W

£

2005-06

Litigation Division and Employment and Commercial Contracts Group

Senior Civil Servant

134

Senior Solicitor (Grade 6)

112

Solicitor (Grade 7)

103

Junior Solicitor (Legal Officer)

64

SEO/HEO

64

Legal Trainee, EO and AO

54

Advisory Divisions

Head of Division

162

Senior Civil Servant

134

Grade 6, 7 Adviser

91

Legal Officer

57

SEO/HEO

57

Legal Trainee, EO, AO

54

2006-07

Head of Division (COCAD)

165

Senior Civil Servant

136

Senior Solicitor (Grade 6)

114

Solicitor (Grade 7), Junior Solicitor

104

SEO/HEO

65

Legal Trainee, EO and AO

56

2007-08

Head of Division (COCAD)

167

Senior Civil Servant

138

Senior Solicitor (Grade 6)

115

Solicitor (Grade 7), Junior Solicitor

106

SEO/HEO

66

Legal Trainee, EO and AO

56

Note:
COCAD—Cabinet Office and Central Advisory Division
HEO—Higher Executive Officer
SEO—Senior Executive Officer
EO—Executive Officer
AO—Administrative Officer

Serious Fraud Office

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General what steps she plans to take following the publication in June 2008 of the final report on the review of the Serious Fraud Office; which organisations will be consulted on the report; and if she will make a statement. [215311]

The Solicitor-General: I refer the hon. Member to my written ministerial statement on 10 June 2008, Official Report , column 12WS. The review by Jessica de Grazia provided helpful insights into the work of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) based on comparisons with US prosecutors.

The new Director of the SFO has found her recommendations on the internal workings of the SFO valuable background for his change programme. We are considering her recommendations on the wider environment in the context of a range of proposals we are already taking forward to strengthen the response to fraud, which is a cross-Government programme of work.


17 July 2008 : Column 554W

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General what discussions the Attorney-General has had with the (a) Secretary of State for Justice and (b) the Home Secretary on the Final Report on the review of the Serious Fraud Office published in June 2008. [215312]

The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General shared Jessica de Grazia’s report with the Secretary of State for Justice and the Home Secretary as it was published, and our officials were then and have since been in contact with officials in both Departments and in the prosecuting Departments to consider the recommendations.

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General what plans there are to enhance co-operation between the Serious Fraud Office, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office. [216029]

The Solicitor-General: The Serious Fraud Office works closely in collaboration with the other Law Officer Departments and the Attorney-General’s Office on a variety of issues. To ensure her Departments work closely together at a strategic level, my noble Friend the Attorney-General chairs a strategic board on which the directors are represented, which meets quarterly.

Serious Fraud Office: Contracts

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General with how many external contractors the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has contracts; what estimate she has made of the average annual cost to the public purse of such contracts; and how many such contractors have held contracts with the SFO in each of the last 10 years. [215314]

The Solicitor-General: The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) does not keep records of the number of external contractors it employs. The cost of all non-permanent staff employed at the SFO (including external barristers) for each of the last 10 years is as follows:

Financial year Expenditure (£)

2007-08

11,521,000

2006-07

10,312,000

2005-06

11,845,000

2004-05

9,492,000

2003-04

8,566,000

2002-03

6,759,000

2001-02

6,596,000

2000-01

5,316,000

1999-2000

4,004,000

1998-99

4,750,000


Serious Fraud Office: Operating Costs

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General what the cost of running the Serious Fraud Office was in each of the last 10 years. [215316]

The Solicitor-General: The cost of running the Serious Fraud Office for each of the last 10 years was as follows:


17 July 2008 : Column 555W
Financial year Annual running costs (£)

2007-08

42,071,000

2006-07

40,415,000

2005-06

39,869,000

2004-05

32,808,000

2003-04

27,791,000

2002-03

26,176,000

2001-02

23,002,000

2000-01

19,608,000

1999-2000

15,860,000

1998-1999

16,027,000


Serious Fraud Office: Powers

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General what plans there are to increase the Serious Fraud Office’s investigatory powers; and whether these plans have been amended to take account of the findings in the Final Report on the review of the Serious Fraud Office published in June 2008. [215307]

The Solicitor-General: At present, there are no plans to extend the investigative powers of the Serious Fraud Office beyond those which were recently provided through the Serious Crime Act 2007.

Serious Fraud Office: Prosecutions

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Solicitor-General how many prosecutions were initiated by the Serious Fraud Office in each of the last 10 years; and what the conviction rate from such prosecutions was in each year. [215322]

The Solicitor-General: The Serious Fraud Office has brought prosecutions against the following number of defendants in each of the last 10 years; and the conviction rates arising from these prosecutions are as follows:

Financial year Defendants tried Conviction rate (percentage)

2007-08

25

68

2006-07

21

71

2005-06

23

57

2004-05

58

64

2003-04

39

51

2002-03

25

68

2001-02

13

77

2000-01

58

88

1999-2000

12

92

1998-99

42

81


Next Section Index Home Page