The hon. Gentleman says that there is no possibility of stopping the creep once the wedge is in the door. When he read the paragraph from my letter, he ended by suggesting that I had said that we wished to give this right only to the prosecution. In fact, what I said in relation to not allowing creep was something different. I said that we had indicated to the House that we had"““no intention of going further than the provisions that are already in the 2003 Act regarding serious and complex fraud trials, and we are concerned that to add a waiver provision—even at the suggestion of the Opposition—could increase the number of non-jury trials and might leave us open to accusations of acting in bad faith.””"
In other words, we decided that we were not going to broaden the wedge. We were, in an act of political will, taking a decision not to do so. It is possible not to do it, by political will.
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 c1607 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:29:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373210
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373210
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_373210