Clause 4
Fraud (Trials Without a Jury) Bill
4:30 pm
Simon Hughes (Shadow Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs & Shadow Attorney General, Constitutional Affairs; North Southwark and Bermondsey, Liberal Democrat)
Just in time is always good enough. I thank the Committee for agreeing to change the time of the sitting because it has allowed colleagues the opportunity to speak on the urgent question in the House. That was much appreciated.
The amendment would delay for two years the period before which the Bill comes into force. I put the arguments for waiting to see how the changes already announced will take place. My final argument was to do with the Government’s review. When do they expect to announce the its conclusions? The consultation finished in October. I understood that we were to expect an answer about now, and people will need to digest that. However, it is another reason for giving Parliament, the Committee and the country time to digest the implications of what has happened in the two years since the Government thought we needed to proceed.
I hope that the Committee can be persuaded that it will be sensible not to rush any changes, even if people are minded to support them in principle. I hope that we can agree that it will be better to wait, take stock of where we are, and then properly evaluate the best way to try cases of serious fraud. I hope that that is an attractive argument.