§ 34. Mr. WatersonTo ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the restructuring of the Crown prosecution service.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI refer my hon. Friend to my earlier reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns).
§ Mr. WatersonI welcome the announcement made by my right hon. and learned Friend a moment ago. Does he agree that the restructuring will produce a more streamlined and effective service to bring to book both serious and less serious criminals in the rising ride of crime that we face at present?
§ The Attorney-GeneralMy hon. Friend is right to emphasise that the review, coupled with the recent improvement in recruitment in the Crown prosecution service, should play a significant part in helping to reduce delays in the criminal justice system.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs it not ironic that people who defraud social security to the tune of, say, a couple of hundred pounds a year in most circumstances, are caught and tried while the Crown prosecution service somehow manages to miss the people who make a small fortune out of City fraud? Why is it that the Crown prosecution service allowed Ernest Saunders to get away with most of his sentence? Why did it say that Roger Seelig, who now runs a business, could not continue his trial because of "nervous exhaustion"? Now he is making a big pile. If the Government want to deal with crime, they should start with the big people at the top—their Tory friends.
§ The Attorney-GeneralThere are two answers to the hon. Gentleman. The first and specific answer is that both the decisions to which he referred, as I should have thought that he realised, were judicial decisions made after careful argument in open court. The second answer is that, in addition to the work done by the Serious Fraud Office, which handles some 50 to 60 large cases a year, the Crown prosecution service handles some 800 to 900 major fraud cases a year. The revised format of the service should also assist in that.
§ 36. Mr. HawkinsTo ask the Attorney-General what was the level of recruitment to the Crown prosecution service in Lancashire in 1991 and 1992; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Solicitor-GeneralIn 1991 the number of lawyers in post in the Lancashire and Cumbria area of the Crown prosecution service increased from 66 to 67. The number of support staff fell from 90 to 88. In 1992, the number of lawyers increased to 76 and support staff to 113.
§ Mr. HawkinsI thank my hon. and learned Friend for that answer. Does he agree that one of the ways in which we can improve the standards of the Crown prosecution service and avoid miscarriages of justice such as the recent Newport Crown court low sentence for rape, which has 679 caused so much outrage, is to ensure that Crown prosecution service lawyers and other employed barristers are given rights of audience in higher courts, to ensure that they have the standard of training in advocacy to enable them to present cases in the public interest and to the best of their abilities?
§ The Solicitor-GeneralThat is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Lord Chancellor and he will no doubt take into account the principles laid down in the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 when he considers whether there is any need for increased rights of audience in the Crown courts.