EU failure of responsibility on UK corruption record

11.55.00am UTC (GMT +0000) Thu 15th Mar 2007

London's Liberal Democrat MEP and European justice spokeswoman Baroness Sarah Ludford has condemned the weak response from the EU Council of Ministers in response to her question about whether the British government breached EU and international anti-corruption laws in calling off the Serious Fraud Office investigation into BAE Systems' dealings in Saudi Arabia.

The Council said it was not obliged to comment on a Member State's respect of either a 2003 EU law on combating corruption or the OECD convention.

Baroness Ludford said:

"It is disgraceful that the Council simply shrugged off responsibility. Lack of concern about a UK 'blind eye' to corruption contrasts starkly with the EU's asserted determination to root out corruption in new member states Romania and Bulgaria and applicant countries."

"Respect by all Member states for anti-corruption rules is a prerequisite for EU moral authority on the international stage in trying to eliminate bribery. The Blair government's block on the BAE investigation has sullied Britain's and indeed Europe's reputation."

Reacting to the rebuke to the UK from the OECD Working Group on Bribery over the decision to terminate the SFO inquiry into the BAE Saudi deal and its decision to send inspectors to London to investigate, Baroness Ludford said:

"This is highly embarrassing not only for the UK government but also for the EU, which has failed to discipline its own Member state over a key EU principle of the rule of law."

Text of Sarah Ludford's question to the Council:

Article 9 of Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA on combating corruption in the private sector requires Member States to transmit to the Council and the Commission by July 2005 the text of provisions transposing its obligations into national law. On the basis of a report established using this information and a written report from the Commission, the Council was due to assess by 22 October 2005 the extent to which Member States have complied with its provisions. Has the Council done this assessment?

In particular, has the Council received full information on the transposition into UK law of the 2003 Framework Decision, and why does it think there have been no UK prosecutions of foreign bribery? In what way does the Council believe that the UK Government's decision in December 2006 to drop the inquiry into corruption in BAE Systems' Al Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia is (a) compliant with UK obligations under the EU Framework Decision, (b) compliant with UK obligations under the 1997 OECD anti-bribery convention, and (c) helpful in the EU's attempts to eliminate corruption in trade deals around the world?