The Assets Recovery Agency plays a key role in the fight against organised crime in Northern Ireland and has an excellent record, exceeding its targets for freezing and restraining assets in each of the past three years.
As the Minister says, the Assets Recovery Agency has a good track record in Northern Ireland in disrupting serious criminal groups and recovering or freezing their assets, in contrast to its rather less impressive performance on the mainland. Why, then, does he propose putting its success at risk by merging it with the Serious Organised Crime Agency, which is untried in this area in Northern Ireland?
The decision to merge SOCA and the Assets Recovery Agency is not my decision to take: it is a decision for the Home Secretary, although one that I fully endorse. As effective as the agency has been, we believe that combining its track record and powers on the civil recovery of criminal assets with SOCA’s capacity to undertake criminal investigations and gather intelligence will give us an even more effective law enforcement agency.
But is the Minister unconscious of the concern rightly or wrongly expressed by some people that the abandonment of the Assets Recovery Agency in Northern Ireland is part of a pay-off—an unspoken deal? That notion is being canvassed around Northern Ireland. Is there not a case for matching as regards the comparable agency in the Republic of Ireland? If we are going to have different arrangements in England, Wales and Scotland, surely the Assets Recovery Agency should stay in Northern Ireland doing its work as a self-standing statutory agency.
Let me say to my hon. Friend, who takes these issues very seriously, that we are not abandoning the Assets Recovery Agency in Northern Ireland. The agency will be merged with SOCA to create an even more effective law enforcement agency. I can say to him absolutely categorically that the decision to merge was not part of any political deal or fix with any party in Northern Ireland. He makes a strong case for close collaboration with the Criminal Assets Bureau in Dublin. That collaboration is in place, and effective working across the border will be a key element of assets recovery work in the years to come.
Will the Minister give an absolute assurance that the transitional costs of merging SOCA with the Assets Recovery Agency will be taken as additional funding from the Home Office rather than out of the budgets of the agency and SOCA, because those budgets should be used to fight crime, not to cover this merger?
All the costs related to the merger of the two agencies will be borne by the Home Office, which is the parent Department for the new agency. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received a categorical assurance from the Home Secretary that the level of resources committed to assets recovery work in Northern Ireland will remain at least at the level that we have at the moment. I take great encouragement from that. The message is very clear that assets recovery work, and indeed the whole fight against organised crime, will continue as never before in Northern Ireland, and rightly so.
As the merger between the Assets Recovery Agency and the Serious Organised Crime Agency progresses, will the Under-Secretary assure the House that the battle against organised crime and to remove the illicit assets of criminals and terrorists will not be undermined? What progress has been made on recovering the Provisional IRA’s £26 million, which it stole in the Northern bank robbery?
Any assets that have been gained through criminal activity are a target for the Assets Recovery Agency and the new merged agency when it comes into operation. Let me say categorically to the hon. Gentleman that the work of the Assets Recovery Agency has continued apace, even since the announcement that was made a short time ago. Indeed, since then, the agency has frozen and restrained nearly £10 million of criminal assets. That is important. Wherever assets have been gained and whoever has gained them are a target for law enforcement in Northern Ireland. That work will continue.
The Under-Secretary knows that there are genuine fears among the police in Northern Ireland that a consequence of the merger could be that the new combined agency’s priorities will be set to raise the greatest amount of revenue on a UK-wide basis rather than in terms of how best to disrupt organised criminal activity. Will he match his assurance about resources with a clear assurance that, in future, assets recovery work and priorities in Northern Ireland will be determined by Northern Ireland’s need to disrupt the evil work of organised criminal gangs?
I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurances that he seeks. Indeed, anything less would not be good enough. I confirm to him and the House that the Home Secretary has agreed that a designated official will be in charge of assets recovery in Northern Ireland. That will be a senior figure in the new agency. No monetary threshold, as exists elsewhere in the UK, will operate in Northern Ireland. That means that we can go for Mr. Small as well as Mr. Big—that is important. We will have our own strategy and targets in Northern Ireland, which will reflect the needs of Northern Ireland.
I welcome that answer. May I press the Under-Secretary further? Does he agree that it would be a good idea and make for an even more effective assets recovery operation in Northern Ireland if the ARA or SOCA in future had the additional powers that the Criminal Assets Bureau in the Republic of Ireland already enjoys?
We continue to examine the powers that are necessary. Indeed, there have been reviews and increases in powers for agencies not only in Northern Ireland but throughout the United Kingdom. Several hon. Members of all parties have raised the matter to which the hon. Gentleman referred. There is a difficulty with the transfer of information from Revenue and Customs in the United Kingdom to the Criminal Assets Bureau in Dublin. We are trying to remove that obstacle at the earliest opportunity. I hope that he and others will be encouraged by that.