Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Goodlad (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 2 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Bribery Bill [HL].


Bribery Bill [HL]

My Lords, I support the amendments tabled by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, my noble and learned friend Lord Mackay and the noble Lord, Lord Pannick. They have expressed the views of your Lordships’ Select Committee on the Constitution in a way on which I shall not elaborate enormously. The second report on the Bill appeared this morning. I shall not dwell upon this, but the prelegislative scrutiny arrangements and the tardiness of the Government’s response to our first report, which was issued at the beginning of December, have made it extremely awkward for people to have time to look into these matters as should be done. As the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, said, the committee takes the view that an act of bribery by the state should not occur without prior authorisation by a Minister. The Government have recognised that principle in their amendments in respect of some agencies, but not others. The argument that it is impractical will not wash and will be subject to a great deal of detailed scrutiny before we conclude our proceedings. Your Lordships’ committee further believes that there may be rare cases—I hope this takes care of the concerns of the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, whose post I frequently receive and who I know receives some of my correspondence—where such authorisation has occurred, in particular, on a class basis where the individual defendant appears to have acted improperly in performing an act of bribery and where prosecution should be considered. Your Lordships’ committee adheres to the view that the defences available to the intelligence services and the Armed Forces should be accompanied by a system of prior ministerial authorisation. In the real world—I appreciate that we, particularly when in government, do not necessarily occupy the real world—if I were a member of those services, I would fervently welcome such prior authorisation. In fact, I might well insist upon it. Your Lordships’ committee will study with great care what the Minister says on this matter. It will deliberate and consult where desirable before returning to these points at Third Reading.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c167 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Armed forces Business Corruption Fraud Intelligence services Expenditure Gratuities GCHQ Ministerial powers National security Prosecutions Public service Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Treaties Trade Corporate hospitality Sales promotions OECD Anti-Bribery Convention Bribery
Legislation
Bribery Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk