(Lab):...The Financial Conduct
Authority and the National Crime
Agency know that banks have been forging customers’
signatures to repossess their homes and businesses. I have had a
dialogue with the Minister before; more than 10,000 pages of
evidence have been submitted. Three years later—nothing. No
action whatever. Even worse, the City of London Police fraud
investigation unit is now funded by Lloyds Bank, which is no
stranger to banking fraud. You cannot make this up...
(CB):...However, in
the UK, what measures are in place, for instance, to ensure that
accurate details are provided in Companies House records? Why are
ultimate beneficial owner rules so easy to avoid and why does
government appear to have been reluctant to implement them? Given
the vast number of suspicious activity reports made by banks and
other institutions to the National Crime
Agency why does the National Crime
Agency have so few resources to follow these up and
to investigate the suspicious activity that has been reported to
it? That leads to considerable frustration in the banks, for
instance, that they report activity but they very rarely get any
feedback. Why does the UK Treasury not have the determined and
aggressive investigative posture of the US Treasury, which has an
impact internationally? Without investigation and enforcement,
regulations are a dead letter...
(LD):...I am focusing on
the registration scheme as a narrow example. It relies heavily on
enforcement. This issue was well described by the noble Lord,
Lord Evans, in a broader context, because that enforcement has to
come from the National Crime
Agency It has 118 staff in total to investigate
financial crime despite the complexity of the issues. Frankly,
the power of the enablers—the lawyers, accountants and property
developers, all of whom are involved in money laundering—is often
overlooked. They are capable of fighting back against any
enforcement agency and making life extremely difficult. I do not
understand why—perhaps the Minister can tell me—we do not say
that at least some portion, if not all, of the money that comes
from fines, forfeitures and confiscations of the wrongdoers
should not flow back to the National Crime
Agency the Serious Fraud Office and even, when
they are engaged with it, to local police forces because we might
finally have a sufficiently funded resource to take action
against corruption. We must also focus on those enablers. I do
not understand why we do not have a failure to prevent anywhere
that I can find in the economic crime Bill. They must be dealt
with, and they must understand that they will pay if they engage
in facilitating corrupt behaviour...
For context, CLICK HERE
