Editorial: None of your business, Chancellor
The Serious Fraud Office have always made a mockery of Britain’s claims to judicial probity
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Reform of the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s veto over complex (and expensive) Serious Fraud Office investigations is long overdue.
Such powers have always made a mockery of Britain’s claims to judicial probity, even more so given that such decisions can be made in secret. And the problem is not going away. Indeed, thanks to the 25 per cent slice taken out of the SFO’s budget by recent Whitehall spending cuts, George Osborne will in all likelihood be called upon more often than any of his predecessors were.
It is no slur on Mr Osborne to point out the gross inappropriateness of the situation. Even if the temptation to consider the political ramifications of an inquiry is resisted, the possible appearance of corruption is damaging enough. Of course, taxpayers’ money must be safeguarded and the SFO’s budget-busting cases signed off. But it should be done by a judge.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments