Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
87 Admissibility of statements made to investigators
(1) A statement made to an investigator by a person in compliance with an information requirement is admissible in evidence in any proceedings, so long as it also complies with any requirements governing the admissibility of evidence in the circumstances in question. (2) But in criminal proceedings in which that person is charged with an offence to which this subsection applies— (a) no evidence relating to the statement may be adduced by or on behalf of the prosecution, and (b) no question relating to the statement may be asked by or on behalf of the prosecution, unless evidence relating to the statement is adduced, or a question relating to it is asked, in the proceedings by or on behalf of that person. (3) Subsection (2) applies to any offence other than— (a) an offence under section 90(6); (b) an offence under section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (false statements made otherwise than on oath); (c) an offence under section 44(2) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 (false statements made otherwise than on oath); (d) an offence under Article 10 of the Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979. (4) In this section— “information requirement” means a requirement imposed by an investigator under section 85 or 86; “investigator” means a person appointed under section 83.
87 Admissibility of statements made to investigators
(1) A statement made to an investigator by a person in compliance with an information requirement is admissible in evidence in any proceedings, so long as it also complies with any requirements governing the admissibility of evidence in the circumstances in question. (2) But in criminal proceedings in which that person is charged with an offence to which this subsection applies— (a) no evidence relating to the statement may be adduced by or on behalf of the prosecution, and (b) no question relating to the statement may be asked by or on behalf of the prosecution, unless evidence relating to the statement is adduced, or a question relating to it is asked, in the proceedings by or on behalf of that person. (3) Subsection (2) applies to any offence other than— (a) an offence under section 90(6); (b) an offence under section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (false statements made otherwise than on oath); (c) an offence under section 44(2) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 (false statements made otherwise than on oath); (d) an offence under Article 10 of the Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979. (4) In this section— “information requirement” means a requirement imposed by an investigator under section 85 or 86; “investigator” means a person appointed under section 83.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.