Results 81–100 of 1125 for speaker:Claire Ward

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: I might be about to deal with the hon. Gentleman’s point, but I will give way.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: As our response to the report by the Joint Committee explained, when assessing the level of all fines, “including those for existing corporate offences, the courts are required by law to ensure that the amount imposed reflects the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the case, including the known financial circumstances of the offender.” That was the concern raised by...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: They are, but it is not for the Government to try to tie the hands of the sentencing court. The court will make a determination after considering the seriousness of the offence, the nature of the business and its assets. At a specific level, the determination is a matter for a court, not the Government. If there is a desire for guidance further to assist the courts to determine what fines are...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: They are not something we can write into the Bill. No amendment of that nature has been tabled by the hon. Gentleman or his colleagues. However, those are issues that the court will consider when taking account of the seriousness of the offence and deciding what is reasonable.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: I think that it should be left to the courts. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 sets out the issues a court must consider when sentencing. The hon. Gentleman has referred throughout our debates to what the Americans do and the practice in other parts of the world, but I want to make it absolutely clear that we are setting a high standard with the Bribery Bill. It is a gold standard, and the Bill...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: Because when our courts are sentencing, they do not think, “What do the Americans do?” They look at guidelines, legislation and what is expected in ¬†this country. We are setting a high standard by stating that the fine can be unlimited, and its level will be appropriate to the circumstances of the case.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: The hon. Gentleman cannot make comparisons between the American system and ours.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: Because the cases that go before the American courts are of a different nature from those that go before ours. They are different because the American system has a body that exempts certain types of cases from ever reaching the courts and the Americans have a different system of plea bargaining.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: Which is the very reason why—I am sorry, Sir Nicholas, that we are straying slightly away from the clause—we are introducing the clause 6 offence. We want to make it easier to deal with cases involving the bribery of a foreign public official, instead of relying on existing legislation, which has not been as effective as we would have liked. That is the precise reason why we want...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: I shall give way one more time before dealing with the matter.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: It would be fair to say that in comparison with other OECD countries, we have dramatically increased the number of live criminal investigations over the past two years. As a result of dedicated police resources, we now have more than 20 live cases. Our foreign bribery investigations have resulted in two non-criminal fines, two criminal convictions and an ongoing prosecution, which puts the UK...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: The hon. Gentleman is wrong to suggest that there has been no action since Second Reading. The matter is under detailed consideration, but it involves complex issues surrounding the possibility of companies being debarred permanently as a result of the implementation of article 45 with regard to clause 7 offences. That is why we are giving the matter serious consideration, and we will come to...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: It is good to have you back in the Chair, Sir Nicholas. I hope that we will have a more conducive sitting this morning. I listened to the hon. Member for Huntingdon with interest. Businesses might want to consider carefully what he said, which was that he wanted more prosecutions. That is not the Government’s policy, because if the Bill works correctly, it will act as an enormous...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: I shall come back to article 45 directions, but I simply say that that will, of course, depend upon the circumstances of businesses, what has happened, how they found out about it, whether they self-referred and whether they were willing to hold their hands up and say, “It shouldn’t have happened and we want to deal with it and co-operate with the authorities.” That is a...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 11 (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: The hon. Gentleman will, no doubt, wish to refer to the appropriate point in Hansard, where he will find that he said in his opening remarks that he wanted more prosecutions. If that is the simple outcome that he wants from the Bill, he fails to see the complexity of the issue and the wider point of how we want the Bill to prevent bribery in the first place. The most important aspect of...

Written Answers — Justice: Arrest Warrants: War Crimes (18 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Straw) wrote on 6 March to the Chairman of the Justice Select Committee, inviting the Committee to consider proposals that were set out in a short paper, 'Arrest warrants-universal jurisdiction'. The Chairman replied on 10 March with the suggestion that the Government should first seek views from appropriate...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 10 (16 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: We have responded quickly and effectively to the other place’s change to the authorisation scheme in the Bill. We have done all we possibly can to ensure that the need for a greater level of oversight is considered, while retaining the importance of the activities of the intelligence services and our armed services, and their ability to rely on the defence. I am sorry that the hon....

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 10 (16 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: The power of the Director of Public Prosecutions extends to the other prosecutors through the Crown Prosecution Service. It does not have to be held directly by the DPP personally. The amendment,  however, requires that action to be performed solely by the directors. I was seeking clarification from the hon. Member for Huntingdon about whether he saw that as a specific requirement, or...

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 10 (16 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: Perhaps I can direct the hon. Gentleman to clause 10(5): “Subsections (3) and (4) do not affect other powers of a Director to authorise a person to exercise functions under subsection (1) or (2).” The Attorney-General gave the view that that authorisation would be at senior level, and we see no need for that detail to be in the Bill.

Public Bill Committee: Bribery Bill [Lords]: Clause 10 (16 Mar 2010)

Claire Ward: I do not think that that is a helpful intervention. It suggests that the Director of Public Prosecutions or the director of the Serious Fraud Office is for some reason not undertaking their full responsibilities. I simply seek to question whether the purpose behind the hon. Gentleman’s amendment was to restrict the power to those three individuals—


<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>

Create an alert

Did you find what you were looking for?

Advanced search

Find this exact word or phrase

You can also do this from the main search box by putting exact words in quotes: like "cycling" or "hutton report"

By default, we show words related to your search term, like “cycle” and “cycles” in a search for cycling. Putting the word in quotes, like "cycling", will stop this.

Excluding these words

You can also do this from the main search box by putting a minus sign before words you don’t want: like hunting -fox

We also support a bunch of boolean search modifiers, like AND and NEAR, for precise searching.

Date range

to

You can give a start date, an end date, or both to restrict results to a particular date range. A missing end date implies the current date, and a missing start date implies the oldest date we have in the system. Dates can be entered in any format you wish, e.g. 3rd March 2007 or 17/10/1989

Person

Enter a name here to restrict results to contributions only by that person.

Section

Restrict results to a particular parliament or assembly that we cover (e.g. the Scottish Parliament), or a particular type of data within an institution, such as Commons Written Answers.

Column

If you know the actual Hansard column number of the information you are interested in (perhaps you’re looking up a paper reference), you can restrict results to that; you can also use column:123 in the main search box.