I appreciate the concern of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, about enforcement and the need to ensure that we impose the right penalties on companies and individuals. ““Person””, I understand, includes bodies corporate or unincorporate. I was interested in what the noble Lord said about the ““approved person”” route. I do not have anything in my notes about that but it is quite an interesting idea. I would be very keen to consider it and we might be able to pursue it.
As to the comments of the noble Viscount, Lord Eccles, obviously the penalty of imprisonment will be used only in the most unusual, extreme and serious cases. But where someone persistently and repeatedly offends it is appropriate that that penalty should be available to us. That is only right and proper because the people who suffer, at the end of the day, are some of the most vulnerable. We need to ensure that there are proper deterrents and penalties for people who continue to offend. The penalties are similar to the ones imposed for contravening a prohibition of a similar regulator such as the Financial Services Authority. That is why the provision is there. I accept that it would not be used casually but it is important to have it.
The noble Lord, Lord Hunt, is obviously concerned that we can capture the individuals involved. I agree with him. One area that I am looking at is the role of the Immigration Services Commissioner. I do not know whether the noble Lord is familiar with it, but perhaps I might discuss with him separately the provisions under Section 84 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The way that Section 91(3) is laid out makes it easier to prosecute employees of a company because it focuses on real negligence rather than the directing of criminal activities. There may be something in there that we can link to the ““approved person”” idea raised by the noble Lord.
I am operating without my notes but I am very taken with the ““approved person”” suggestion. I hope the noble Lord will allow me to take it away, discuss it further and come back to him and the Committee at a later stage.
Compensation Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Compensation Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c330GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:58:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293738
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293738
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293738