The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Migration and
Borders () (Con):...Where there
are overseas victims in bribery, corruption and economic crime
cases, the Serious Fraud Office, Crown Prosecution Service and
National Crime
Agency compensation principles have committed law
enforcement bodies to ensuring that compensation is considered in
every relevant case, and to using whatever available legal
mechanisms to secure it where appropriate...
...Turning first to Amendment 106EC, I am assured that,
throughout the bidding prospectus and subsequent business case
processes, freeports were required to set out how they will
manage the risk of illicit activity. I will go into this in some
detail because it is important and, as I am not a specialist in
this subject, I asked for extra detail. These plans were approved
by officials in the Border Force, HMRC, the NCA
and other relevant crime prevention bodies, including the Home
Office, the police, the Department for Transport and DLUHC.
At business case stages, freeports are required to commit to
further requirements to mitigate risk. That includes commitments
to the OECD’s code of conduct for clean free trade zones and they
were required to establish robust local governance structures in
place to monitor risk and ensure effective co-operation between
relevant bodies with remits to prevent illicit activity. In most
cases, that included most of the bodies I have already
referenced—the police, NCA, and so on. Those
plans were approved by officials who have responsibility for
security and preventing illicit activity across government, and
they are also required to carry out an annual audit of security
each year to ensure that these structures remain effective and
the risk mitigations remain robust and relevant. These audits
will be reviewed by the Government annually...
For context, OPEN HERE
