Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Investigations in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: Code of Practice) Order 2008

I thought it might help concentration, but I quite understand. We have laid an Explanatory Memorandum and a code of practice for the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cash Searches: Code of Practice) Order 2008, which provide the background to and the reasons for the need for both the order and the code. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, police and Customs officers were given powers to search, seize, detain and seek the forfeiture of cash which had been obtained through unlawful conduct or intended for use in such conduct. Forfeiture is a civil matter before the magistrates’ courts. These powers have been a triumph. Approximately £1 million is being seized every week, and the amounts forfeited last year accounted for 25 per cent of the £125 million total of all criminal proceeds recovered. The powers, which are set out in chapter 3 of Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act, were extended by the Serious Crime Act 2007. Section 79 of, and Schedule 11 to, the Serious Crime Act will broaden the availability of the powers to accredited financial investigators. An accredited financial investigator is an investigator who is not a constable or officer of her Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, and who has been trained and accredited by the National Policing Improvement Agency under Section 3 of the Proceeds of Crime Act. They are accredited to allow them access to various powers in the Proceeds of Crime Act. Up until now, accreditation and training have been provided by the Assets Recovery Agency, which has accredited members of staff of, for example, the Financial Services Authority and the Department for Work and Pensions. At the moment, those investigators can apply for investigation orders, search warrants and restraint orders. Any execution of warrants or searches has remained the preserve of the police and Customs. As experience in use of the Proceeds of Crime Act has developed, many agencies now operate their financial investigation cases wholly independently of the police, so it makes sense that they have the full range of powers in the Act. The Serious Crime Act makes the necessary amendments come into force on 6 April. As of that date, accredited financial investigators will be able to search for and seize cash. The Proceeds of Crime Act has a number of safeguards attached to the search power, one of which is the code of practice which provides guidelines as to how the search powers are to be exercised. There is an existing code, but it covers only constables and officers of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. It has been successfully in operation for some five years, but it requires updating to cover the extension of the search powers to accredited financial investigators. The code of practice is before us today, as is the draft order which is required to bring the code into operation on 6 April. The matter is not controversial, because the code is required only as a consequence of amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act. The code has taken account of developments in wider law enforcement trends; for example, I draw attention to paragraph 8, which introduces a requirement to consider whether a search may have an adverse effect on relations between law enforcement and the community, and to consult the community liaison officer if necessary. It should also be noted that the code has been subject to a public consultation exercise. It has been revised in the light of comments received. A summary of those responses will be issued in due course. I turn to the Serious Crime Act 2007 (Amendment of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002) Order, which makes a minor amendment to Section 280 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. It is straightforward and, we think, uncontroversial. In civil recovery cases under the 2002 Act, the organisation responsible for taking proceedings for a civil recovery order is known as the enforcement authority. Under amendments made by the Serious Crime Act 2007, the enforcement authority in England, Wales and Northern Ireland can be one of a number of authorities; for example, the Serious Organised Crime Agency or the Director of Public Prosecutions. Where a court makes a recovery order, it must appoint a trustee for civil recovery. The enforcement authority must nominate someone suitably qualified to act as a trustee, who might be someone from its own staff. The trustee acts on behalf of the enforcement authority. The trustee must secure the property that will be vested in him or her and liquidate non-cash assets for the benefit of the enforcement authority. The trustee must also get the best price for the property vested in him to maximise the amount payable to the enforcement authority. Section 280 of the 2002 Act sets out what has to be done with the money that the trustee has collected under the recovery order. Once certain payments have been made from the moneys recovered, any remaining sum has to be paid by the trustee to the enforcement body. The enforcement authority can use the money it receives to pay the remuneration and expenses of the trustee. However, the enforcement authority is not allowed to deduct salary costs when a member of its own staff has been appointed as a trustee. On the other hand, the enforcement authority should be able to recover these costs where the trustee is an outside contractor engaged by that authority. The effect of the amendments made to the 2002 Act by the 2007 Act has been to make it unclear what the proper position of the contractors is as regard the netting off of remuneration from recovered moneys. The amendment in this order simply puts the position beyond doubt to ensure that the contractor’s salary costs can be deducted. I hope that point is clear. I beg to move.