argyrotsipi/train-dataset huggingface dataset:
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their points on this amendment. The Government are as one with the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, that agencies must not be limited in their efforts to investigate wrongdoing and protect the public from harm. He has tabled an amendment which touches on this very concern The noble Lord will be aware of the significance of the amendments that the Government have introduced to reform the cost rules as applied to UWO cases. Protection from costs mean that the court only has discretion to award costs against an enforcement agency, as he knows, if it acted dishonestly, unreasonably, improperly, or not on grounds that appear to be reasonably sound. The UWO procedure is an investigative tool and is not determinative of civil rights or obligations. It is used to obtain information about the ownership of certain property that may not otherwise be available to an enforcement agency Existing case law—as the noble Lord has pointed out, in magistrates’ courts through Part 5 applications—enables them to routinely adopt a position that they will not order costs against law enforcement where the agency has acted honestly, reasonably, properly and on grounds that reasonably appeared to be sound. However, this does not occur in High Court cases, where the costs involved are often much higher and for which protection is now given in the Bill in relation to UWO cases. The Government will ensure we are doing everything appropriate to ensure law enforcement agencies are equipped to take on corrupt elites, and their costs liabilities are appropriately mitigated. I hope that gives the noble Lord the comfort that he needs.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): I share the sentiment of my noble friend that they will not be a niche activity. The measures in this Bill, particularly in terms of costs, will make it far easier for our law enforcement agencies to not be stymied by costs in bringing these things forward.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Law and Crime
Theodore Agnew (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I shall speak in support of my amendment, which seeks to achieve two things: an annual review of the funding adequacy of our crime-fighting agencies in this area, and a report within three months of the Bill, and annually thereafter, to set out how well we are managing this whole area I know we will hear warm words from the Minister about various sums of money—£400 million and so on—but the brutal reality is that this whole thing has been abysmally funded; that is the only way we can describe it. The noble Lord, Lord Cromwell, is right that the NCA’s own funding has fallen by some 4% in real terms at a time when international crime has been soaring.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: International Affairs
Tariq Ahmad (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I thank all noble Lords for these amendments. I must admit that, as we reach the end of Committee, I find myself in a somewhat novel position as the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Minister to your Lordships’ House, talking to some amendments which have been raised in other departments. I am grateful to all noble Lords who have engaged directly with my noble friend Lord Callanan, my noble friend Lady Williams and me on various issues. I thank all Front-Benchers for their direct engagement. It was an intense weekend of toing and froing for many people, but again, it shows the best of your Lordships’ House when we come together on such an important issue. Talking more broadly as the Sanctions Minister and the FCDO Minister, everyone understands the importance of getting the Bill through at the earliest opportunity, and I am grateful for noble Lords’ engagement in Committee.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Government Operations
Tariq Ahmad (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I stray into the work of other departments—both the Home Office and the Treasury—but I can assure noble Lords that this is an all-of-government approach, ensuring that not only are we acting appropriately in whatever department we need to act, but of course that there is appropriate funding and support for the actions we are taking.
Genetically Modified Organisms (Deliberate Release) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2022 — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Agriculture
Rupert Ponsonby (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I will be brief, but I start by declaring an interest as the owner of a farm. I am a newcomer to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, but there is a danger here that those reading our reports could confuse our criticism of the Government’s process, which is our legitimate purpose, with criticism of the policy, which is neither our purpose nor our duty Unfortunately, much of the developing world has been misled into a suspicion of GM technology by a misapprehension that the EU has operated under a blanket ban on GM crops for many years. The reality is different: in fact, the EU has a long-standing regulatory process designed specifically for GM crop approval. In practice, however, polarised views across the EU member states have meant that the scientific evidence has often been ignored, crops have remained stuck in the system, and it was therefore difficult to make progress. However, views seem now to be changing in the EU.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Law and Crime
Martin Callanan (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, the Government have put forward a number of amendments to the register of overseas entities provisions. These amendments will address a number of the concerns of Members of this House. The amendments expand the information requirements for registrable beneficial owners to include information about whether they are designated by virtue of the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 The amendments also provide a revised threshold for the offence of providing false statements. These no longer have to have been submitted knowingly or recklessly. Rather, it will be an offence when the statement is merely misleading, false or deceptive and the person has no reasonable excuse for supplying such a misleading statement, with an additional aggravated offence carrying a higher penalty where it can be proved that a false statement was made knowingly The Government seek to make amendments to require the Secretary of State to consult with Scottish and Northern Ireland Ministers before making regulations to amend parts of the Bill that legislate on devolved land law matters. I beg to move.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Law and Crime
Martin Callanan (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank both the noble Lords, Lord Coaker and Lord Fox, for their extremely constructive engagement over the course of the weekend and over the course of a number of meetings and chats today. I really am very grateful for their constructive attitude and for their willingness to be open to the arguments that we have deployed in why we genuinely do not think that reducing the transition period further is a runner, for a whole variety of reasons we have discussed—I will not go into detail now. But I am grateful—I want to put that on record—for the support of the Opposition parties in accepting this as emergency legislation that we want to get through as swiftly as possible and passed down to the other place I also note their interest in seeing a rapid introduction of the measures of this Bill and their focus on ensuring its effective implementation—and also their interest in a wider range of issues that can be covered in the Bill. The forthcoming legislation on economic crime will, as I have said previously, provide for significant reform of the powers of the Companies House registrar. These will directly interact with the provisions of this Bill, enhancing further its effectiveness—for instance, by providing greater powers to query and act on the information on the register. I would be happy, therefore, to commit the Government that this House will have the opportunity to review the effectiveness of the current legislation in that wider context of our discussion on the new powers. I am also committed to the rapid implementation of the measures in this Bill, and I would also be happy to commit to updating the House on the Government’s progress on this within six weeks of this measure achieving Royal Assent I can reassure noble Lords that the further economic crime Bill that the Government intend to introduce in the next Session will be a broad one. We will, of course, consider and carefully examine any amendments put forward in either House which serve to strengthen our frameworks for tackling economic crime. As my honourable friend the Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Labour Markets—who I am pleased to see at the Bar of the House—said in the other place last week, we are committed to bringing forward the next economic crime Bill early in the next Session I hope that has provided sufficient reassurance for the noble Lord and that, therefore, he will feel able to withdraw his amendment.
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-14
Topic: Macroeconomics
Martin Callanan (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I am happy to confirm and accept the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Fox, also signed by the noble Lord, Lord Coaker, which was originally Amendment 43. It removes an exemption from reporting where this is in the interests of the economic well-being for the UK. As I said in Committee, I have listened carefully and we have engaged on this. In reflection of this and, as has been said, in the interests of working together to progress this vital legislation collaboratively and swiftly, the Government are happy to support this amendment.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
George Young (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, in his opening remarks my noble friend spoke to Amendment 89, and I hope that it is in order to introduce a more consensual note to this debate by welcoming Amendment 89. The first subsection of the new clause states: "The Vagrancy Act 1824 is repealed." This shows the value of your Lordships’ House. When the legislation came to this House, there was nothing in it at all about the Vagrancy Act. But an all-party campaign, led by the noble Lord, Lord Best, who had hoped to speak to this amendment, inserted an amendment that would have repealed the Vagrancy Act in its entirety. That went back to the other place and, following a very constructive meeting with the Minister, my noble friend Lady Williams, and Minister Eddie Hughes, a satisfactory compromise was reached that is set out in Motion J and government Amendment 89, which, as I said, begins: "The Vagrancy Act 1824 is repealed." My noble friend explained that there may be sections of the Vagrancy Act that need to be kept and therefore that total repeal is subject to a review, with an undertaking that it will be repealed in its entirety, subject to that review, within 18 months. I am most grateful to my ministerial friends for their constructive approach and I wonder whether the Minister, when he winds up, can say when the review that he referred to will be completed, and when we can have the assurance that there is nothing in the Vagrancy Act that needs to be kept and that, within the total span of 18 months, it will be repealed in its entirety. On behalf of all those who supported the campaign led by the noble Lord, Lord Best, I say that we very much welcome the outcome of our discussions.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): I thank the noble Lords, Lord Ponsonby and Lord Paddick, for their very constructive comments, and the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of Cradley, for her always very constructive approach in bringing these matters forward The point about someone having to identify as a prostitute is a really serious matter. I say again that anyone who makes a report to the police would benefit from the anonymity provisions in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992. The Section 52 offence applies when an identified victim has been caused to engage in prostitution or incited to do so, whether the prostitution takes place or not. The Section 53 offence applies where a victim has on one or more occasions provide sexual services to another person in return for financial gain The consultation on this will be before the Summer Recess. We will write about the terms of reference once they are settled. The consultation will be confined to the case for a bespoke new offence On the online safety Bill and where it meets what we have been talking about, the legislation will define the harmful content and the activity covered by the duty of care. This includes illegal content and activity, harms for children and legal but harmful content, and activity for adults. The relevant offences, which are Sections 52 and 53 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, have been included in that list of priority illegal harms in the Bill, demonstrating the importance that the Government attach to the tackling of these harms I hope that answers the noble Lords’ questions. Again, I thank them for their constructive work on this.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
David Wolfson (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lords who took part in this debate. I will take matters fairly briefly, given the amount of other business before the House On the duty of candour, I emphasise the essential point that the disciplinary system provides clear sanctions that can lead to dismissal. We should not introduce criminal sanctions for the police alone. Ultimately, the inspectorate can determine whether forces are following the guidance. We will monitor that extremely carefully I do not want to take up the House’s time too much on the report, which has been published in the last half an hour. My right honourable friend the Home Secretary has already issued a statement, which noble Lords will be able to find online, but my understanding is that the Metropolitan Police has 56 days to respond formally to the report. The Home Secretary will of course return to Parliament to provide a full government response once the final report and responses have been received I am grateful to all noble Lords for their engagement on the issue of secure schools. I have tried to set out the legal position clearly. I hope that the undertaking that I have set out will be sufficient. Again, with apologies to the House for not dealing in too much detail with the new report, because I am sure there will be other opportunities to debate it, I beg to move.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Gabrielle Bertin (Conservative, Centre-right): My Lords, I support the amendment and thank the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, for all his support on this issue. I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws: "What a powerful speech" I particularly want to reiterate the points made about police recording. I am really quite depressed that this amendment has had to be laid—depressed as a Conservative Peer, because I have been so heartened by the commitment that this Government have shown on the issue of violence against women and girls. But at the moment, on the issue of misogyny—it exists, it is there and is corrosive; it is huge, if you ask me—there is a lack of grip. There has also been a lack of leadership and accountability, in particular on the issue of recording, and that really matters It matters because we should not make promises at the Dispatch Box and not keep them. That picks away at the faith and trust we have in our democracy. I do not wish to make too big a point out of this, but it is important and we do notice it. It also matters because it helps victims to have much more faith in the system; it gives them confidence. We have heard that from chief constables who have voluntarily taken this approach on board. It matters because it helps them do their job as well. It helps them target their resources, understand where the repeat perpetrators are, and target the culture within their own police forces—which, as we know, is a huge problem I hope that noble Lords will support the amendment, as I will. It really matters. Misogyny exists, it is corrosive and it needs to be tackled, and this is a very thoughtful and reasonable approach.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment 88A 88A: Leave out lines 5 to 9 and insert— "(2) In subsection (1)— (a) after "liable to" insert "imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or"; (b) for "not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale" substitute "or both"."
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do not insist on its Amendments 89 and 146 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 146A and 146B in lieu 146A: Page 56, line 32, at end insert the following new Clause— "Repeal of the Vagrancy Act 1824 etc (1) The Vagrancy Act 1824 is repealed (2) Subsections (3) to (7) contain amendments and repeals in consequence of subsection (1) (3) The following are repealed— (a) the Vagrancy Act 1935; (b) section 2(3)(c) of the House to House Collections Act 1939 (licences); (c) section 20 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 (power of magistrates’ court to commit on bail for sentence); (d) in the Criminal Justice Act 1982— (i) section 70 and the italic heading immediately before that section (vagrancy offences), and (ii) paragraph 1 of Schedule 14 and the italic heading immediately before that paragraph (minor and consequential amendments); (e) section 43(5) of the Mental Health Act 1983 (power of magistrates’ courts to commit for restriction order); (f) section 26(5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 (alteration of certain penalties); (g) in the Criminal Justice Act 2003— (i) paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 25 and the italic heading immediately before those paragraphs (summary offences no longer punishable with imprisonment), and (ii) paragraphs 145 and 146 of Schedule 32 and the italic heading immediately before those paragraphs (amendments relating to sentencing); (h) paragraph 18 of Schedule 8 to the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (powers of accredited persons) (4) In section 81 of the Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1907 (extending definition of public place and street for certain purposes), omit the words from "shall", in the first place it occurs, to "public place, and" (5) In section 48(2) of the Forestry Act 1967 (powers of entry and enforcement), omit "or against the Vagrancy Act 1824" (6) In the Police Reform Act 2002— (a) in Schedule 3C (powers of community support officers and community support volunteers)— (i) omit paragraph 3(3)(b), (ii) omit paragraph 7(3), (iii) in paragraph 7(4), omit "or (3)", and (iv) in paragraph 7(7)(a), omit "or (3)", and (b) in Schedule 5 (powers exercisable by accredited persons), omit paragraph 2(3)(aa) (7) In the Sentencing Code— (a) in section 20(1) (committal in certain cases where offender committed in respect of another offence)—(i) at the end of paragraph (e), insert "or", and (ii) omit paragraph (g) (and the "or" immediately before it), and (b) omit section 24(1)(f) (further powers to commit offender to the Crown Court to be dealt with) (8) The amendments and repeals made by this section do not apply in relation to an offence committed before this section comes into force." 146B: Page 194, line 22, after "61" insert ", (Repeal of the Vagrancy Act 1824 etc)"
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Education
David Wolfson (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do not insist on its Amendment 107, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 107A 107A: Because the amendment is unnecessary as there is no legal barrier to local authorities setting up and running academies.
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do not insist on its Amendments 114, 115 and 116 and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments 116A and 116B in lieu 116A: Page 137, line 5, at end insert— "(3A) A report under subsection (3) must in particular include— (a) information about the number of offenders in respect of whom serious violence reduction orders have been made; (b) information about the offences that were the basis for applications as a result of which serious violence reduction orders were made; (c) information about the exercise by constables of the powers in section 342E of the Sentencing Code (serious violence reduction orders: powers of constables); (d) an assessment of the impact of the operation of Chapter 1A of Part 11 of the Sentencing Code on people with protected characteristics (within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010); (e) an initial assessment of the impact of serious violence reduction orders on the reoffending rates of offenders in respect of whom such orders have been made; (f) an assessment of the impact on offenders of being subject to a serious violence reduction order; (g) information about the number of offences committed under section 342G of the Sentencing Code (offences relating to a serious violence reduction order) and the number of suspected offences under that section that have been investigated." 116B: Page 137, line 22, after "section" insert— "serious violence reduction order" has the same meaning as in Chapter 1A of Part 11 of the Sentencing Code (see section 342B of the Sentencing Code);"
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Law and Crime
Susan Williams (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do not insist on its Amendments 141 and 142, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reasons 141A and 142A 141A: Because conduct requiring or arranging sexual relations as a condition of accommodation may already constitute an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and the Government is committed to undertaking a consultation on whether the law in respect of such conduct needs to be strengthened 142A: Because conduct requiring or arranging sexual relations as a condition of accommodation may already constitute an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and the Government is committed to undertaking a consultation on whether the law in respect of such conduct needs to be strengthened.
Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Bill — House of Lords, 2022-03-22
Topic: Government Operations
Nicholas True (Conservative, Centre-right): That this House do not insist on its Amendment 1, to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 1A 1A: Because the Commons do not consider it appropriate that the dissolution of Parliament should be subject to a vote in the Commons.