The hon. Gentleman has covered some of the points that I wanted to make. It is an extraordinarily naïve view to suggest that the measure is not the wedge to which he refers. Even if we were to accept the argument that juries have difficulties with such trials, which is not supported by the evidence, the best argument was put forcibly by his right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg): no argument with any intellectual integrity can distinguish between the circumstances of a complex fraud trial and other long and complex trials. Any argument that the Government use, therefore, to support this measure can equally be applied, and sure as eggs is eggs, will be applied, to other trials in the future, which is why it is so imperative that we defeat it either here or in another place.
Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Heath
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 25 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
455 c1589 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:29:23 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373170
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373170
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373170