Clause 1
Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill
11:15 am
Mike O'Brien (Solicitor General, Law Officers' Department; North Warwickshire, Labour)
The clause is important. It removes the obligation for there to be an affirmative resolution before commencement and paves the way for the implementation of section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. That allows for the prosecution in serious and complex fraud cases of persons before a judge sitting alone without a jury.
I have listened with care to the debate. I shall deal first with the procedural point raised by the hon. Member for Beaconsfield, then look at some of the points that were raised about the consultation before saying something about the substance.
Clause 4 will commence the Bill, rather than implement section 43 of the 2003 Act. It will amend that section, but there will need to be a commencement order to bring the section into force. I hope that that deals with the hon. Gentleman’s procedural question and his concerns about regulations and so on.
It was never intended that there should be a formal consultation such as those on White Papers, Green Papers and legislation. Our view was always that the Bill would provide an opportunity for representatives of the Opposition to meet Ministers to discuss whether there was room for agreement on the way forward on non-jury trials. To facilitate that, the Attorney-General organised a seminar, which was held in January 2005 and attended by spokespersons from the Opposition. The hon. Member for Somerton and Frome said that the Liberal Democrats were not in attendance. Well, they were invited, and Lord Thomas of Gresford attended. I understand that he is a Liberal Democrat spokesman.