Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Serious Fraud Office

Thursday 4 February 2021 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Minister regularly meets the director of the Serious Fraud Office to discuss progress on tackling serious fraud, bribery and corruption.
  • The Serious Fraud Office has a judicial outcomes rate of 95% by case and 62% by defendant from 2016-17 to 2019-20.
  • The Solicitor General states that the SFO has proper funding and that the legal framework is reviewed to ensure effective prosecution.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Barry Sheerman Lab
Justice & Courts
Context

The MP is concerned about the SFO's effectiveness and resources. The question follows a previous discussion on similar issues.

Question

What steps she is taking to ensure the effectiveness of the Serious Fraud Office?

Answer from Michael Ellis

I regularly meet the director of the Serious Fraud Office and her senior leadership team to discuss the SFO's progress in tackling serious fraud, bribery and corruption. The SFO has a high judicial outcomes rate of 95% by case and 62% by defendant from 2016-17 to 2019-20. This financial year, the SFO agreed two deferred prosecution agreements contributing over £44 million to Her Majesty's Treasury.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The MP's concern about underfunding and under-resourcing was not directly addressed

How: I Appreciate The Hon. Gentleman'S Point That There Are Always More Resources That Could Be Utilised

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Barry Sheerman Lab
Justice & Courts
Context

The MP is concerned about the SFO's ability to take on complex cases due to perceived underfunding and understaffing. He references recent inquiries into British American Tobacco.

Question

May I remind the Minister that many people believe the Serious Fraud Office is seriously underfunded and under-resourced? It has just abandoned its inquiry into British American Tobacco. When is he going to start again, look at the SFO, and give it the resources it needs to go after these real problems?

Answer from Michael Ellis

The reality is that the SFO has proper funding. The Attorney General and I meet the leaders of the Serious Fraud Office on a regular basis, and they know this Government supports them in their work. They have obtained guilty pleas for bribery offences in the Petrofac case and secured convictions and agreements with Airbus and Airline Services.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The need to identify “directing mind” in corporate cases was not addressed

How: Although I Appreciate The Hon. Gentleman'S Point That There Are Always More Resources That Could Be Utilised

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Bob Neill Con
Justice & Courts
Context

The MP and his committee wish the Attorney General well as she starts maternity leave. The question addresses the legal challenges faced by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in tackling serious corporate crime.

Question

May I start by asking the Solicitor General to convey to my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General the good wishes of myself and the members of the Select Committee on Justice? Does she recognise that it is not just a matter of resources, but also legal framework? Will swift action be taken once the Law Commission reports at the end of the year?

Answer from Michael Ellis

I will convey his remarks. As far as the SFO's ability to prosecute matters is concerned, these issues are kept under constant review. The law must keep up with issues at hand to enable effective prosecution by the Serious Fraud Office and the Crown Prosecution Service.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific need for swift action was not committed to

How: These Issues Are Kept Under Constant Review

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email