|Proceeds of Crime Bill
Mr. Grieve: I confess that the Minister now worries me slightly. We are discussing a claim in which the burden relating to the balance of probabilities is on the director to establish to the court's satisfaction that, on the balance of probabilities, a particular item constitutes proceeds of unlawful conduct, either on the part of the individual involved, or on the part of another person, and that the individual involved has acquired them in some form. From that, I would have assumed that it was central to the case that the director should at least be able to establish what is the unlawful conduct that he alleges is the centrepiece of the case.
Mr. Ainsworth: That is not necessarily the case. We have discussed widely how criminal proceeds may become dissipated, how they may change and change again. We have discussed how, in the course of his investigations, the director will have to pursue those changes to the end. No doubt, he will know that it is not simply a case of a tree growing from a single pointa particular criminal offencebut that there two ends to those roots. Criminal proceeds may become intermixed in such a way that they cannot possibly be unravelled. They may also be hidden in some complicated process, often by design, to prevent their discovery.
Column Number: 696
Nothing that I have saidand nothing in the clausedetracts from the necessity for the director to show, on the balance of probabilities, that those proceeds are the proceeds of crime. Nothing can take that away. The hon. Gentleman need not fear that. We have discussed the type of situation in which a gang may have carried out a gold bullion raid, when the bullion subsequently becomes cash, then property, and then cash again. The same gang, or associated gangs, may have pulled off a bank robbery, too. To insert a requirement that makes it necessary to prove that the proceeds came from the gold bullion raid and not the bank robbery would be ridiculous beyond belief.
Mr. Grieve: This is an interesting and an important discussion. I accept that, in civil recovery proceedings of the proceeds unlawful conduct, it may be possible to invite the court to draw an inferencefrom the totality of the evidencethat the only explanation for the origin of assets is unlawful conduct. However, I should also expect that, if the director believes that there are specific assertions to be made in respect of property, he will make those assertions. It worries me that what the Minister has just said sounded very much like the assumptions under the confiscatory procedure, which plainly it is not.
Mr. Ainsworth: No, it is not. It is civil recovery of the proceeds of crime, requiring the director to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the property concerned is the proceeds of crime. It would make life unnecessarily difficult if the director had, in every single case, to show that the proceeds were those of a particular crime. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman believes that to be a necessity, nor that he wishes us to go down that road. I am not saying anything that detracts from the level of proof required by the director to prove his case. I do not accept his point and I certainly do not accept that the director must, in all circumstances, prove the individual criminality that led to the proceeds being generated.
Amendment No. 353 to clause 249 would take the same action in respect of Scotland. The hon. Gentleman asked me specifically to confirm or otherwise why subsections (3) and (4) were drafted and whether they attempt to limit the requirements under the civil procedure rules. The civil procedure rules will apply in full to the claim form procedure. Subsection (3) is intended to clarify one particular aspect of what must go into the claim form under civil procedures. He is absolutely right. We are seeking to amplify, not restrict, what is required under the civil procedure rules. For those reasons, I ask him not to press that amendment.
Mr. Grieve: Again, I am slightly disappointed with the Minister's response. The amendment does not seem incompatible with what he says should be possible within the framework of such litigation. The amendment says:
Column Number: 697
Mr. Ainsworth: It is my understanding that it is not so much the case that we would like to hear about the offence but that there would be a requirement to disclose such information.
Mr. Grieve: There is also the concept of unlawful conduct. It would be worrying if the Minister could launch litigation to recover the proceeds of unlawful conduct without being able to identifyeven in general termswhat unlawful conduct the person is alleged to have committed or is connected with by innocently receiving money. That would suggest that proceedings could be launched as fishing expeditions, and that was not the Government's intention in introducing the Bill. If that is the intention, the sooner it is knocked on the head the better. The Minister has not satisfied me about the clause.
Vera Baird: Is it not plain that the court will not be able to carry out its duty under section 246(3) to
(a) that any matters alleged to constitute unlawful conduct have occurred''
It has been repeatedly said that the white book, with which the hon. Gentleman is well acquainted, will be part and parcel of the procedure. Any aggrieved respondent will be able to apply for further and better particulars and interrogatories in the normal way. Refinements from proceedings are a great feature of the civil procedure rules. The hon. Gentleman has nothing to worry about.
Mr. Grieve: The hon. Lady makes a good point. I was about to say that if the information could not be provided, the case would have no prospect of getting off the ground. I shall reverse the argumentI am prone to doing that, but it is worth doing. If the information must be provided, why should that not be spelled out in the Bill? I am more than 90 per cent. confident that she is correct. If information about the criminal offence cannot be supplied, the action has no chance of success, but why not spell out that it should be supplied?
The amendment was promoted by the Law Society, which expressed anxieties about the issue. It considered the matter and thought that the issue should be further refined. Fortified though I am by the hon. Lady's comments, I do not understand why the provision should not be in the Bill. It should be included because of the unusual powers that may be exercised. I see that the Minister is being handed a note, so I shall give him the opportunity to intervene if he wishes to do so.
Column Number: 698
Mr. Hawkins: While my hon. Friend is pausing for the Minister to read the note, perhaps he will accept an intervention from me.
My hon. Friend is right to say that the Law Society shares our concerns. I draw the attention of the hon. Lady and the Minister to the fact that the Law Society expressed its concerns in the following way:
The Chairman: Order. That was too long an intervention.
Mr. Grieve: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for those remarks. However, I will not respond to them, as the Minister wishes to say something.
Mr. Ainsworth: I have very little to say, I am afraid. I have received some information. With regard to our earlier discussion, there is no need to spell out that it should be supplied, because of the civil procedure rules. I doubt that the hon. Gentleman finds that exciting, and it is a great shame that he is, repeatedly, so disappointed in me.
Mr. Grieve: Although I am grateful to the Minister, Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes. I wish to press the amendment to a Division.
Question put, That the amendment be made:
The Committee divided: Ayes 4, Noes 10.
Division No. 17]
Mr. Wilshire: On a point of order, Mr. O'Brien. For the benefit of the ignoramusessuch as mewho are present, can it be arranged for Hansard to include a translation of the Latin phrase that was quoted?
Mr. Hawkins: Further to that point of order, Mr. O'Brien. I am sure that the staff of Hansard are familiar with the expression, ''Beware Greeks bearing gifts.''
The Chairman: That is not a point of order for the Chair.
Clause 248 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 249 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Column Number: 699
|©Parliamentary copyright 2001||Prepared 13 December 2001|