Let me deal with this issue. I will then give way.
What I have just said is not the reason that section 43 is needed. It is not part of our case to suggest that juries or judges in such cases bring in verdicts that are unsafe. The presence or absence of the jury will not have an effect on the fairness of the trial itself.
In his closing remarks, the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) seemed to reveal what the new clause is really about. He said that if it is passed, it is very unlikely that there will ever be a non-jury trial. In other words, it is a wrecking amendment. It seeks to wreck the intention behind the Bill. I therefore inform Opposition Members that the Government will oppose it.
Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mike O'Brien
(Labour)
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 c1590 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_373174
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373174
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373174