In answering my point, the Minister postulated two categories. First, she was concerned that Mr Big, who had been convicted, would go back to his evil ways. The second category is that of the auxiliary who had assisted by selling him dodgy vehicles with false bottoms. I thought the main purpose of Part 1 was to deal with Mr Very Big who is behind Mr Big, but against whom it was not possible to adduce admissible evidence in a criminal court to get him convicted. Is that person a target of this Bill and, if so, does that not completely disappear if Amendments Nos. 87 and 88 are passed? You will not be able to get at Mr Big—who I thought was Mr Very Big—which I thought was the Government’s main aim.
Serious Crime Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Bledisloe
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 March 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c249-50 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:07:07 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382713
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382713
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_382713