|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
23 Oct 2002 : Column 308Wcontinued
The Solicitor-General [holding answer 22 October 2002]: There is a longstanding convention, followed by successive Governments, that neither the substance of the Law Officers' advice, nor the fact that they have been consulted, is normally disclosed outside Government. The Law Officers' advice is given in confidence to the Government.
The Solicitor-General [holding answer 22 October 2002]: The Director of the SFO is already entitled, under Section 1 (3) of the Criminal Justice Act 1987, to investigate any offence that appears to her on reasonable grounds to involve serious or complex fraud. Offences of corruption and money laundering are therefore already included in the range of offences open to the SFO to investigate provided they meet key criteria. Amongst others, these include where the sum at risk is estimated to be at least #1 million or the case is likely to give rise to national publicity and widespread public concern or the case has a significant international dimension. All or some of these factors can be present in an allegation of corruption or money laundering and if so then the SFO may investigate.
The SFO has, in fact, successfully investigated and prosecuted 10 cases involving offences of corruption and/or money laundering since its inception in 1988. These cases have led to prison sentences or suspended sentences for the defendants, often coupled with disqualification from acting as a company director. The SFO is also currently investigating several similar allegations.
23 Oct 2002 : Column 309W
|Year (5 April4 April)||Number of Defendants||Number Convicted||Conviction rate|
|5.4.02up to 21.10.02||12||10||83%|
These figures are impressive and consistently high. The SFO also judges its own performance by looking at accumulated figures since its inception in 1988. Here the conviction rate has steadily increased, particularly over the last five years. By 1993 the accumulated conviction rate by defendant was 63 per cent., in 1997 it was 66 per cent. and so far this year it has risen to 71 per cent.
Mr. Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what proposals were made by farming industry representatives regarding the softening of the economic impact on the herd movement restrictions as a result of bovine TB during the meeting with them on 27 June. 
Mr. Morley: Farming industry representatives made a number of proposals regarding the softening of the economic impact on herd movement restrictions as a result of bovine TB. Over the summer officials have considered the potential policy options and veterinary risk assessments have been carried out. After further meetings with stakeholders a package of measures was announced on 9 October. One element of the package focuses on the licensed movement off-farm of non-reactor cattle in the following circumstances:
Defra is considering how to manage the risk from movement of animals onto herds affected by TB from farm to farm under a strict protocol. The policy for this is still being developed and it is hoped that an announcement can be made in November.
Mr. Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what the conversion rate for energy from people applying for a warm front grant has been in each of the last five years for which figures are available in (a) the Blackpool South constituency, (b) the Blackpool Unitary Authority area, (c) in each Government office region and (d) England; 
23 Oct 2002 : Column 310W
(3) how many complaints about attempts to sell energy contracts in association with warm front grants have been received by (a) her Department, (b) Ofgen and (c) warm front contractors and subcontractors in each of the last five years for which figures are available; 
(4) what discussions she has had with (a) Ofgem, (b) Energywatch and (c) other consumer and regulation agencies, about potential conflicts of interest when subcontractors promoting warm front grants (i) advertise for alternative energy suppliers on warm front promotional literature and (ii) set aside time to promote energy suppliers within warm front assessment interviews. 
Mr. Morley [holding answer 15 October 2002]: Warm Front was launched in June 2000 and provides assistance to certain groups in receipt of a qualifying income or disability benefit by installing packages of insulation and heating measures.
Warm Front does not promote products or sell energy from individual energy companies. Households are free to choose their own supplier and may, like any consumer, opt to change after 28 days. Two Scheme Managers, Eaga Partnership and TXU Warm Front administer Warm Front. Some of the heating measures offered under Warm Front may require the household to be connected up to an additional electrical supply for night storage heaters or mains gas for the first time.
Following a tender exercise an agreement was entered into between Defra and two companies: Scottish Power and TXU Energi. For those requiring a gas central heating the preferred supplier was Scottish Power and for a combined electric and gas fuel supply from the Stay Warm tariff provided by TXU Energi. By August 2002 almost 4,000 homes had received a new gas supply. The majority of these households have not used the preferred suppliers.
Neither Scheme Managers have received complaints about mis-selling of energy contracts. I cannot comment on behalf of OFGEM. The Department has received one specific complaint relating to Nestmakers, an independent organisation jointly and equally owned by Scottish Power and Eaga Partnership Ltd. The allegation was investigated and found to be unproven.
Nestmakers also undertake home surveys for Warm Front in Eaga Partnership's catchment area. Nestmaker surveyors are aware that Warm Front is mutually exclusive to any energy supply contract. Nestmakers will take disciplinary action against any surveyor who is proved to have sold an energy supply contract on the conditional understanding that it was needed to access Warm Front.
Mr. Morley: We prefer a trade in meat to the export of live animals. However we also accept that European law requires the free movement of goods between EU member states and this includes live animals.
23 Oct 2002 : Column 311W
Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions she has had with National Assembly for Wales Ministers regarding the 20-day livestock movement regulations. 
Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what percentage of applications for the over-thirty month early casualty scheme (a) were able to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the Intervention Board that they should receive the set rate of 85.6p.p.kg, (b) were paid the flat rate of #230 for their casualty animals and (c) are waiting to be paid. 
Mr. Morley: (a) No animals presented into the Early Casualty Scheme were paid 85.6p/kg. Only animals successfully presented onto the main Over Thirty Month Scheme received the full OTMS payment. All successful claims under the Early Casualty provisions, for animals put down between 3 and 24 May 1996 but not presented onto the OTMS, were paid at the flat rate of #230.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|