Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

101519

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	European Arrest Warrants
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent assessment he has made of the usefulness of the European Arrest Warrant as a prosecutorial tool.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212405
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2014 answer text <p>The Government and the DPP are in agreement that the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) offers the best way of keeping Britain safe, particularly from serious criminals and terrorists.</p><p>The introduction of the EAW has resulted in much faster processing of extradition requests, meaning that we can secure the return of fugitives wanted for serious offending in this country often in a matter of weeks, not many months or even years as was the case under previous arrangements. The Arrest Warrant is also more effective. For example, under the previous regime, the European Convention on Extradition, some Member States can refuse to surrender their own nationals, including France, Germany and Spain, which is not the position in EAW cases. Furthermore, the EAW overcomes problems of time limitation in other countries. It also means that wanted people can now be extradited to face fraud and tax charges, which was not the case before.</p><p>The Government has recently made changes in the way that the EAW is processed through our courts. These changes are designed to offer greater protection to UK citizens and other UK residents against disproportionate requests and the risk of spending unreasonable lengths of time in pre-trial detention abroad. With those changes in place, the Government is convinced that the EAW provides an effective and cost-efficient tool in the fight against trans-national crime, and it is one which prosecutors and other law enforcement professionals are keen to see preserved.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright grouped question UIN 212406 question first answered 03/11/2014 17:02:26 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101520

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	European Arrest Warrants
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions on the usefulness of the European Arrest Warrant as a prosecutorial tool.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212406
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2014 answer text <p>The Government and the DPP are in agreement that the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) offers the best way of keeping Britain safe, particularly from serious criminals and terrorists.</p><p>The introduction of the EAW has resulted in much faster processing of extradition requests, meaning that we can secure the return of fugitives wanted for serious offending in this country often in a matter of weeks, not many months or even years as was the case under previous arrangements. The Arrest Warrant is also more effective. For example, under the previous regime, the European Convention on Extradition, some Member States can refuse to surrender their own nationals, including France, Germany and Spain, which is not the position in EAW cases. Furthermore, the EAW overcomes problems of time limitation in other countries. It also means that wanted people can now be extradited to face fraud and tax charges, which was not the case before.</p><p>The Government has recently made changes in the way that the EAW is processed through our courts. These changes are designed to offer greater protection to UK citizens and other UK residents against disproportionate requests and the risk of spending unreasonable lengths of time in pre-trial detention abroad. With those changes in place, the Government is convinced that the EAW provides an effective and cost-efficient tool in the fight against trans-national crime, and it is one which prosecutors and other law enforcement professionals are keen to see preserved.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright grouped question UIN 212405 question first answered 03/11/2014 17:02:26 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101011

	registered interest
	date	27/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Private Finance Initiative
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many private finance initiative projects the Law Officers' Departments contracted for in each year from 1997 to 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Brighton, Kemptown
	tabling member printed	Simon Kirby
	uin	212091
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has had two private finance initiative (PFI) contracts between 1997 and 2010 as follows.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong><em>Information Technology (IT) managed service</em></strong></p><p> </p><p>The Department's IT service is provided through a PFI managed service contract with CGI (formally Logica) which was let from 1 April 2002. The contract currently runs until 30 November 2015 and provides for further extension options until 31 March 2017.</p><p> </p><p><strong><em> </em></strong></p><p> </p><p><strong><em>Communications managed service</em></strong></p><p> </p><p>The Department's communications are provided through a managed service PFI contract with Level 3. This was let from 1 April 2006 and the contract runs until 30 November 2015.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The remaining Law Officers’ Departments have not contracted any PFI projects during the specified period of time.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 03/11/2014 17:21:33 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	3929 label Biography information for Simon Kirby

101296

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	GPT Special Project Management
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether the Serious Fraud Office has sought his assistance with securing evidence from the Ministry of Defence in relation to its investigation into GPT Special Project Management Ltd.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow Central
	tabling member printed	Anas Sarwar
	uin	212318
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>The Attorney General and I meet the Director frequently to discuss a variety of issues. However, as was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government’s policy to provide details of all such meetings.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office announced in August 2012 that the Director had opened a criminal investigation into allegations concerning GPT and aspects of the conduct of their business in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, however it would not be appropriate to give a running commentary on the progress of current investigations.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 212319 212320 212325 question first answered 04/11/2014 14:39:09 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	3981 label Biography information for Anas Sarwar

101297

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	GPT Special Project Management
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether any representations have been made to him or to the Director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) stating that the public interest would be served by entering into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement in relation to the SFO's investigation of GPT Special Project Management Ltd.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow Central
	tabling member printed	Anas Sarwar
	uin	212320
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>The Attorney General and I meet the Director frequently to discuss a variety of issues. However, as was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government’s policy to provide details of all such meetings.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office announced in August 2012 that the Director had opened a criminal investigation into allegations concerning GPT and aspects of the conduct of their business in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, however it would not be appropriate to give a running commentary on the progress of current investigations.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 212318 212319 212325 question first answered 04/11/2014 14:39:10 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	3981 label Biography information for Anas Sarwar

101298

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	GPT Special Project Management
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many meetings staff from the Serious Fraud Office have had with officials of the Ministry of Defence in relation to its investigation into GPT Special Project Management Ltd; and on what dates those meetings took place.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow Central
	tabling member printed	Anas Sarwar
	uin	212319
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>The Attorney General and I meet the Director frequently to discuss a variety of issues. However, as was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government’s policy to provide details of all such meetings.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office announced in August 2012 that the Director had opened a criminal investigation into allegations concerning GPT and aspects of the conduct of their business in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, however it would not be appropriate to give a running commentary on the progress of current investigations.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 212318 212320 212325 question first answered 04/11/2014 14:39:10 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	3981 label Biography information for Anas Sarwar

101299

	registered interest
	date	28/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	GPT Special Project Management
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether he has conducted a public interest consultation exercise or sought ministerial representations on the public interest in relation to the Serious Fraud Office's investigation into GPT Special Project Management Ltd.
	tabling member constituency	Glasgow Central
	tabling member printed	Anas Sarwar
	uin	212325
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>The Attorney General and I meet the Director frequently to discuss a variety of issues. However, as was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government’s policy to provide details of all such meetings.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Serious Fraud Office announced in August 2012 that the Director had opened a criminal investigation into allegations concerning GPT and aspects of the conduct of their business in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, however it would not be appropriate to give a running commentary on the progress of current investigations.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 212318 212319 212320 question first answered 04/11/2014 14:39:10 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	3981 label Biography information for Anas Sarwar

101614

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, for which offences the Crown Prosecution Service routinely monitors the number and proportion of cases that fail because of victim issues.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212435
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2014 answer text <p>The CPS defendant case outcome records include an allocation of a reason for each unsuccessful outcome, including the number which did not proceed because of victim issues. These records are centrally collated under the following twelve Principal Offence Categories.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Homicide</p><p> </p><p>Offences against the person</p><p> </p><p>Sexual offences</p><p> </p><p>Burglary</p><p> </p><p>Robbery</p><p> </p><p>Theft and handling</p><p> </p><p>Fraud and forgery</p><p> </p><p>Criminal damage</p><p> </p><p>Drugs offences</p><p> </p><p>Public order offences</p><p> </p><p>Motoring offences</p><p> </p><p>All other offences</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 19/11/2014 12:38:15 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101615

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Fraud: Wales
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many fraud prosecutions the Crown Prosecution Service has brought in Crown Courts in Wales in each of the last five calendar years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212436
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the numbers of defendants and the outcome of prosecution proceedings, divided into twelve Principal Offence Categories, including ‘Fraud and Forgery’.</p><p> </p><p>The category of ‘Fraud and Forgery, includes offences prosecuted by way of the Fraud Act 2006, fraudulently evading income tax, VAT, excise duty or national insurance, bankruptcy offences, money laundering, forgery or using a false instrument and obtaining property, services or pecuniary advantage by deception.</p><p> </p><p>The table below shows, in each of the last five calendar years, the number of defendants prosecuted and finalised, in Crown Courts in Wales, where the Principal Offence was categorised as ‘Fraud and Forgery’.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>Total Prosecutions</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2009</strong></p></td><td><p>181</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2010</strong></p></td><td><p>163</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2011</strong></p></td><td><p>185</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2012</strong></p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013</strong></p></td><td><p>149</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Data Source: CPS Management Information System</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Principal Offence Category is assigned at the end of a prosecution to indicate the most serious offence with which a defendant is charged at the time of finalisation. It is not possible to disaggregate the outcomes of individual offences, such as fraud, without undertaking a manual search of case records which would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This table does not include those cases prosecuted by the DWP prosecution teams that merged with the CPS in 2012, as the DWP Cardiff team prosecutes cases in Crown Courts in England, as well as Wales. It is not possible to provide a breakdown of cases prosecuted solely in Wales without incurring a disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 05/11/2014 15:53:50 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101616

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Sham Marriage: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many prosecutions the Crown Prosecution Service has brought on breaches of immigration law arising from sham marriages in each of the last five financial years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212437
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>Offences of breaching immigration law may be prosecuted by way of Section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 (assisting unlawful immigration to a European Union Member State) or by way of Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act (conspiracy).</p><p>The offence created by Section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 encompasses both the offence of assisting illegal entry (whether by smuggling someone in a vehicle or by providing false documents for presentation at a port) or by assisting someone to remain by deception (for example, by entering into a sham marriage) which facilitate a breach of the immigration laws. Conspiracies to facilitate breaches of immigration law are charged by way of Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977.</p><p>The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) indicate the number of offences charged, in which a prosecution commenced at magistrates’ courts for assisting unlawful immigration or conspiracy. However it is not possible to disaggregate which of these offences relate to sham marriages rather than other immigration law breaches without reviewing individual case files which would incur a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 04/11/2014 14:31:53 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry