Fraud Bill [HL]

I am very grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General for that extremely full and extremely clear exposition of the Government’s position on this. I certainly understand what their position is. However, we have debated this matter now for virtually an hour. It certainly would not be appropriate for me to try to respond to what the noble and learned Lord has said because to do so would to a very large extent be to repeat what I said in moving Amendment No. 18 and in speaking to the amendments that are grouped with it. I should like to make some brief points. It is not so much that I would positively welcome the suggestion that the Government could allow on to the face of the Bill the abolition of common law conspiracy to defraud but defer its implementation, but that I recognise its inevitability, because the commencement clause in the Bill, as in virtually every other Bill, leaves it up to the Government when to bring it in and provides powers to bring in some parts and not others. The Attorney-General mentioned that there was some law on this matter. I recollect a judicial review a few years ago when it was held that it was not appropriate for a Minister simply to decide that a provision in the Bill would never be brought into force, without referring it back to Parliament. But that decision would not prevent a government from taking the view that a provision should not be brought into force for some time while the effect of the other provisions of the Act were considered. This is an important issue. While we have had a full debate, it is almost inevitably a matter which we will wish to bring back for further consideration on Report. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 6 [Possession etc. of articles for use in frauds]: