Bribery Bill [HL]

My Lords, I shall do my best. These amendments relate to the definition of a relevant commercial organisation for the purposes of the Clause 7 offence of the failure of commercial organisations. Clause 7(5) states that a relevant commercial organisation means a body which is incorporated under the law of any part of the United Kingdom and which carries on a business, whether there or elsewhere. It also covers any other body corporate, wherever incorporated, which carries on a business, or part of a business, in any part of the United Kingdom. Amendment 12 would have the effect of widening the scope of the clause so that any body incorporated in the UK would be covered by the offence, whether or not it was carrying on a business. Widening the scope of the offence in this way is not justified in our view because the offence is specifically targeted at commercial organisations that use bribery in the course of their transactions. This is why subsection (1) requires that the person concerned intended to obtain or retain business or an advantage in the conduct of business. It would also be inconsistent with the approach to bodies incorporated outside the UK, where, under subsection (5)(b), the requirement that the body concerned carries on a business remains unchanged by these amendments. The noble Lord asked how it could reasonably apply if it were not carrying on a business. We agree, but for the avoidance of doubt we are leaving it as it is in the wording. We also consider it important to make clear that the offence applies whether a body incorporated in the UK carries on a business in the UK or elsewhere. It is a crucial part of our foreign bribery strategy, and our desire to create a level playing field internationally, that the offence covers UK corporations that carry on business overseas. This fact has been welcomed by the OECD, which has stated that, ""such coverage is necessary, since foreign bribery is often committed by multinational enterprises that operate in multiple jurisdictions around the world"." With regard to foreign companies operating in the UK, I recognise that the Joint Committee voiced some concerns that the phrase "part of a business" might be difficult for the courts to interpret, but we believe the courts will interpret the term in a common-sense manner. Clearly, if a foreign corporation has part of its business in the UK, and that part is guilty of paying bribes, we would want the jurisdiction to prosecute the organisation concerned. We believe the amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Henley, would weaken the offence unnecessarily by casting doubt on its jurisdictional extent. I therefore invite the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.