My Lords, I declare an interest: I am a lawyer, but I have never practised in criminal law and I hope that that will not become too apparent during our discussions on the Bill.
There are a number of extremely serious flaws in the Bill, to which my noble friend Lord Thomas of Gresford and other noble Lords referred, and I hope to be able to advert to some of those during the later stages. We are facing yet another Home Office Bill, and it is a Bill that has serious and fundamental flaws which undermine the liberties of our fellow citizens.
I should like to say a few words about the targets of the Bill: the tracing and sequestration of assets, intelligence, the international exchange of information and tax fraud. The Minister has said that many of the targets of this legislation are ““not stupid””. That is an understatement. I note that individuals, companies, limited liability partners and presumably trustees are covered by the Bill, but I think that everyone in the House will agree that much serious crime has an international element and that enforcement will, in many instances, depend on the co-operation of other jurisdictions.
We rely on other jurisdictions for exchange of information and intelligence. In Committee, we shall have the opportunity to gauge whether sufficiently effective systems of international co-operation are already in place and whether we are using them adequately, properly and conscientiously. We need information and intelligence from overseas jurisdictions but we also need to be able to recover proceeds of crime from banks and other institutions and even from the most—shall I say?—protective and opaque regimes.
There are additional powers to assist the quest of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to bring tax fraudsters to justice. I appreciate, and wholeheartedly agree with the Minister, that these powers are not appropriate in respect of HMRC’s day-to-day compliance work, but I remind her that in some countries—for example, in Switzerland, I believe—things such as tax fraud are definitely not criminal but civil matters.
The successful detection and prosecution of tax fraud often leads to the discovery and detection of other serious offences. Some years ago, the Government embarked on a series of international negotiations, even involving tax-haven countries, for more open exchange of information. I debated in the other place the first of such orders some two or so years ago. The order gave us very limited rights to obtain very limited information. In Committee, we shall have the opportunity to gauge the progress that the Government are making in tackling serious international crime and their effectiveness in pursuing such crime, given the powers that they already have.
As I said, there are some major and fundamental objections to parts of the Bill, but we shall wish to probe the effectiveness of existing powers, as well as the appropriateness and proportionality of the powers that the Government are seeking to take.
Serious Crime Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Burnett
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 February 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c754-5 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:06:13 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376658
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376658
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376658