DOCSLIB.ORG

Home Office Procurement Notice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Home Office Procurement Notice Home Office Procurement Notice Small and Medium sized Enterprises: The Home Office is committed to supporting small medium enterprises (SMEs) cross government agenda and is actively contributing to the 25% aspiration. About Us: The Home Office is the lead government department for policies on immigration, passports, counter- terrorism, policing, drugs and crime. The Procurement Centre of Excellence (PCoE) provides a buying function for common non strategic goods and services across the Home Office Group. It has the value proposition to make it easier for people to buy from who we want them to, in the way we want them to, to deliver maximum value for money. The Home Office includes agencies, non-departmental public bodies and inspectorates. Our agencies cover UKBA, CRB, IPS and NFA whilst information regarding the NDPB‟s can be found on the Home Office website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/ The Home Office conducts its business in a fair, open and transparent manner. It deals with a multitude of local, national and global organisations - from those with just a few employees to those with many thousands. All suppliers to the Home Office are appointed in line with EU and National regulations relating to public sector procurement, following fair and open competition. Doing Business with the Home Office: The Home Office is obliged by law to maintain certain standards in the way it operates and these apply equally to its Suppliers. Before awarding a contract the Home Office will undertake certain checks to establish whether these standards are being met. More information on doing business with the Home Office may be found at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/procurement/doing-business/ COMMS 034C National Fraud Awareness Campaign -ONLINE 1.Background to the Requirement National Fraud Authority The National Fraud Authority (NFA) is an executive agency of the Home Office. Set up in 2008, it leads and coordinates the fight to reduce fraud affecting; individuals and public, private (including SME`s) and third sector organisations. As part of this delivery, the NFA runs Action Fraud, the nat ional fraud and internet crime reporting centre, which is a first of its kind police service enabling members of the public and businesses to report fraud online or by phone and to get prevention advice. Action Fraud To date, Action Fraud has seen over 784,003 unique visits to its website (www.actionfraud.police.uk) and more than 219,452 calls have been made through the contact centre (0300 123 2040). All information reports and fraud crime reports are sent to the National Fraud intelligence Bureau (NFIB), a police intelligence system operated by the City of London Police that looks at fraud reports from Action Fraud and data from other sources to help identify criminals involved in fraud. The National Fraud Segmentation The National Fraud Segmentation (NFS) research was conducted by the Government with industry support, in 2011, in recognition that self-protection is essential to avoiding becoming a victim of fraud and that a targeted approach to developing the public‟s ability to achieve this was required. The NFS is the bedrock for the behaviour change activity the NFA and partner organisations undertake to help individuals and business better self-protect from fraud. It maps individuals‟ behaviour and attitudes attempting to pinpoint activities, situations and life stages at which they are the most vulnerable to fraud with the plan of intervening at these stages to increase self-protection. The adult population has been broken down into 7 segments within the NFS; a copy of which is available at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/agencies-public-bodies/nfa/national-fraud-segmentation. A four year behaviour change strategy has been developed, which determines the journeys each of the 7 identified segments should take in order to successfully self-protect from fraud. Cross-sector partnership One of the NFA‟s main aims is to drive the fight against fraud by encouraging and facilitating effective and collaborative efforts across all sectors. An essential element of achieving this is building cross-sector partnerships to raise awareness of fraud and change behaviour amongst individuals and businesses. In March 2012, the first campaign funded jointly by the NFA, the banking and telecommunications industry, „The Devil‟s in Your Details‟ campaign, demonstrated what could be achieved when the public and private sector coordinate their fraud prevention activity. This campaign specifically targeted two segments (women aged 35-55 and both males and females within the 18-25 bracket) – both groups prone to regularly giving out their personal information. Further information on the campaign can be viewed at www.actionfraud.police.uk/thedevilsinyourdetails. The campaign succeeded in persuading 68% of those who viewed the videos to change the way they treated their personal information Next tranche of work Following on from the success of „The Devil‟s in Your Details‟ (DYID) campaign, the NFA has held discussions about future activities with a working group comprising members of the banking community, public sector, third sector and law enforcement agencies. The working group support an extension of the DYID campaign to increase the resilience of 35 to 55 year old men (Seg 4) who are at high risk online and when investing. The behaviours of these segments lead to an approximated loss of £ 3.35 Billion (£2.7bn Id Fraud, £1.17bn high risk investment scams, £0.16bn property investor scams). • The group has potentially more to lose and less ability to recover losses due to age – losses could affect retirement • They are the second most likely segment to lose money to fraud. They tend to lose large amounts in certain investment based frauds which not only effect them but their families – sometimes severely • A significant percentage of this group are either sole traders or small/medium sized business owners who fall under high risk/ loss categories re: fraud in their business lives (NFA SME segmentation) • Messaging should focus around; “ take care when investing”, “know who you‟re giving your details to”, secondary messaging – “fraud costs your business – put preventative measures in place” Requirement/Specification: The NFA and its stakeholder group are seeking to extend the „Devil‟s in Your Details‟ campaign and develop a pilot programme of activity to help Segment 4 to mitigate the risks they take when investing on and off-line. Delivery of the campaign is planned for November/December 2012. The primary target audience for this campaign is specifically focused on Segment 4. They can be further characterised by: 1. Their attitudes towards fraud – that it won‟t happen to them/ more clever than a fraudster – have all the knowledge 2. They don‟t take adequate precautions online 3. They are opportunity/ risk seekers The key activity within the proof of concept campaign will be an online engagement approach using viral videos or other online activity. This is the focus for this ITT. The online collateral will be supported by PR and seeding activity provided by a partner agency which will be secured separately. Objectives: The campaign should bring about behaviour change in the way individuals approach risk and recognise fraud. • To raise awareness of the risks taken with personal information and finances when going online • To encourage the adoption of practising due diligence when investing • To find help when in doubt - „ask for directions!‟ • To increase traffic to Action Fraud to report fraud and seek advice Delivery of the campaign will fall in November/December 2012. A separate Tender exercise is being run for the outreach – stakeholder engagement – face to face with the target audience, and another tender for the PR. For this tender: Agencies are required to: To develop an innovative proposal for the design and delivery of the online collateral within a cross- sector integrated communications and engagement proof of concept campaign that results in a demonstrable change in behaviour and attitudes towards fraud. The proposal should be developed with „bronze, silver, gold‟ activity and cost options for targeting both segments included in the proof of concept, enabling a choice for partners on level of involvement in relation to funding. To develop an effective programme of measurement and evaluation to gauge the impact and success of the campaign collateral as part of the wider measurement activity. Suggested key activities across the proof of concept campaign to include: a) A targeted digital campaign focusing on trigger behaviour points aiming to „shock‟ segments into change which could utilise online videos and apps (Subject of this ITT) b) Customer education activity – investment portals engage directly with target segments c) PR and media activity eg, engage key opinion leaders, case studies, shock figures Specific Specialist Skills/Capabilities/Qualifying requirements: Experience of conducting awareness/ engagement campaigns Experience in targeting and achieving behavioral change across vulnerable audiences as identified within the National Fraud Authority‟s (NFA) segmentation research (copy available at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/agencies-public-bodies/nfa/national-fraud-segmentation) T ender Timetable: Action Date Advertise on Contracts Finder Friday 31st August Issue ITT Fri 7th Sept Clarification questions Until Tues 11th Sept Issue Clarification responses Thur 13th Sept Tender Return Date Fri 14th Sept Bid Evaluations Mon 17th Sept Contract Award Weds 19th Sept Contract Commencement and kick off meeting W/C 24th Sept Deliverables Nov/Dec 2012 Duration: campaign to be delivered Nov/Dec 2012 Location: Across the UK Evaluation Criteria For Bids: EVALUATION CRITERIA Weighting 1.VFM - costs 5% 2. Organisational information – please give a brief description of your organisation (in no more than 150 words) 5% 3. Experience of conducting awareness/ engagement campaigns 20% 4. Experience in targeting and achieving behavioural change across vulnerable audiences as identified within the NFA segmentation research 40% 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The UK Cyber Security Strategy: Landscape Review (Full Report)
    REPORT BY THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL HC 890 SESSION 2012-13 12 FEBRUARY 2013 Cross-government The UK cyber security strategy: Landscape review Our vision is to help the nation spend wisely. We apply the unique perspective of public audit to help Parliament and government drive lasting improvement in public services. The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Amyas Morse, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 860 staff. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice help government improve public services, and our work led to audited savings of more than £1 billion in 2011. Cross-government The UK cyber security strategy: Landscape review Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 11 February 2013 This report has been prepared under Section 6 of the National Audit Act 1983 for presentation to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the Act Amyas Morse Comptroller and Auditor General National Audit Office 5 February 2013 HC 890 London: The Stationery Office £16.00 This landscape review describes government’s evolving approach to cyber security and describes the programme of work it has under way.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Crime Annual Strategic Assessment
    FOOD CRIME ANNUAL STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT A 2016 Baseline NATIONAL FOOD Scottish Food Crime & CRIME UNIT Incidents Unit This document is produced by the National Food Crime Unit on behalf of the Food Standards Agency and Food Standards Scotland TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD . 3 THE UK FOOD CRIME UNITS . 4 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 5 An industry vulnerable to crime . 5 Taking the right approach . 6 Reporting gaps . 6 The challenge for the wider economy . 6 Leading the fight against food crime . 7 2 STRATEGIC CONTEXT . 8 2 1. Purpose and structure . 8 2.2 Defining food crime and government responsibilities . 9 2 .3 Information sources and limitations . 11 3 FOOD IN THE UK: SETTING THE SCENE . 16 3 1. Trade and international connectivity . 16 4 THE IMPACT OF FOOD CRIME . 18 4 .2 Consumer detriment . 18 4 .3 Industry detriment . 20 4 4. Detriment to wider UK interests . 20 5 LINKS BETWEEN FOOD CRIME AND OTHER CRIMINALITY . 22 6 THREAT ASSESSMENT BY COMMODITY . 25 6 1. Red meat . 25 6 .2 Poultry and eggs . 28 6 .3 Diversion of waste products . 29 6 4 . Fish . 30 6.5 Shellfish . 31 6 .6 Dairy products . 33 6 7. Animal feed . 34 6 8 . Alcohol . 35 6 .9 Olive oil . 37 6 10. Fruit and vegetables . 38 6 11. Herbs, spices and nut and seed powders . 40 6 12 . Rice . 41 6 13. Supplements and similar products . 41 1 FOOD CRIME ANNUAL STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT: A 2016 Baseline 7 CRIMINAL TECHNIQUES, METHODS AND ENABLERS . 45 7.1 Falsified or inaccurate documentation . 45 7 .2 Redirection of waste products and re-dating of stock .
    [Show full text]
  • Daylight Robbery
    Daylight Robbery Uncovering the true cost of public sector fraud in the age of COVID-19 By Richard Walton, Sophia Falkner and Benjamin Barnard Daylight Robbery Uncovering the true cost of public sector fraud in the age of COVID-19 By Richard Walton, Sophia Falkner and Benjamin Barnard Policy Exchange is the UK’s leading think tank. We are an independent, non-partisan educational charity whose mission is to develop and promote new policy ideas that will deliver better public services, a stronger society and a more dynamic economy. Policy Exchange is committed to an evidence-based approach to policy development and retains copyright and full editorial control over all its written research. We work in partnership with academics and other experts and commission major studies involving thorough empirical research of alternative policy outcomes. We believe that the policy experience of other countries offers important lessons for government in the UK. We also believe that government has much to learn from business and the voluntary sector. Registered charity no: 1096300. Trustees Diana Berry, Alexander Downer, Pamela Dow, Andrew Feldman, David Harding, Patricia Hodgson, Greta Jones, Edward Lee, Charlotte Metcalf, David Ord, Roger Orf, Andrew Roberts, George Robinson, Robert Rosenkranz, William Salomon, Peter Wall, Simon Wolfson, Nigel Wright. Daylight Robbery About the Authors Richard Walton served as a police officer in the Metropolitan Police in London for thirty years (1986-2016). A former Commander at New Scotland Yard, he was Head of the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command (SO15) between 2011-2016. He is now a Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange and a Distinguished Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI).
    [Show full text]
  • Time to Choose: an Inspection of the Police Response to Fraud
    Fraud: Time to Choose An inspection of the police response to fraud April 2019 © HMICFRS 2019 ISBN: 978-1-78655-784-1 www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................... 4 Summary ................................................................................................................... 6 Summary of findings ................................................................................................ 8 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 22 Areas for improvement .......................................................................................... 27 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 28 About our inspection ............................................................................................. 28 About fraud ........................................................................................................... 28 Context ................................................................................................................. 30 2. Strategy: How well designed is the strategic approach for tackling fraud? 37 The national strategic approach to tackling fraud ................................................. 37 How well understood is the fraud threat? .............................................................. 45 How is good
    [Show full text]
  • The Performance of the Home Office 2012-13
    DEPARTMENTAL OVERVIEW The performance of the Home Office 2012-13 DECEMBER 2013 Our vision is to help the nation spend wisely. Our public audit perspective helps Parliament hold government to account and improve public services. The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Amyas Morse, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 860 staff. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice help government improve public services, and our work led to audited savings of almost £1.2 billion in 2012. Contents Introduction 4 Part One About the Department 5 Part Two Recent NAO work on the Department 20 Appendix One The Home Office’s sponsored bodies at 1 April 2013 29 Appendix Two Results of the Civil Service People Survey 2012 30 Appendix Three Publications by the NAO on the Department since April 2012 32 Appendix Four Cross-government reports of relevance to the Department since April 2012 33 Links to external websites were valid at the time of publication of this report. The National Audit Office is not responsible for the future validity of the links. 4 Introduction The performance of the Home Office 2012-13 Introduction Aim and scope of this briefing 1 The primary purpose of this report is to provide the Home Affairs Select Committee with a summary of the Home Office’s activity and performance since September 2012, based primarily on published sources, including the Department’s own accounts and the work of the National Audit Office (NAO).
    [Show full text]
  • (2016) the Fraud 'Justice Systems': a Scoping Study On
    The Fraud ‘Justice Systems’: A Scoping Study on the Civil, Regulatory and Private Paths to ‘Justice’ for Fraudsters Main Report November 2016 Professor Mark Button, Dr David Shepherd and Dean Blackbourn THE FRAUD JUSTICE SYSTEMS Table of Contents Page Number Table of Acronyms 3 1. Introduction 5 2. The Extent of Non-Criminal Justice for Fraud 12 3. Regulatory Justice 26 4. Contempt of Court 51 5. Fraudster Registers 57 6. Emerging Themes, Conclusions and Recommendations 95 7. Methods Used 103 8. References 108 9. Appendix 114 Page 2 THE FRAUD JUSTICE SYSTEMS Table Acronyms ACCA – Association of Chartered Certified Accountants ASA – Advertising Standards Authority BSB – Bar Standards Board BTAS – Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service CAA - Civil Aviation Authority CCW – Care Council for Wales CIMA – Chartered Institute of Management Accountants CPS – Crown Prosecution Service CIPFA – Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy DBS - Disclosure and Barring Service DWP – Department for Work and Pensions FCA – Financial Conduct Authority FFA – Financial Fraud Action FSA – Financial Services Authority GC – Gambling Commission GLA – Gangmasters Licensing Authority GMC – General Medical Council HCPC – Healthcare Professions Council HMG – Her Majesty’s Government HMRC – Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs ICAEW – Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales IFED – Insurance Fraud Enforcement Directorate IFR – Insurance Fraud Register Page 3 THE FRAUD JUSTICE SYSTEMS MCA – Maritime and Coastguard Agency MPTS – Medical Practitioners
    [Show full text]
  • Fighting Fraud Together
    Fighting Fraud Together The strategic plan to reduce fraud Fighting Fraud Together 2 The strategic plan to reduce fraud Contents Collective statement of intent 4 Introduction 6 Section 1: The fraud challenge 9 The criminal threat 9 The future trajectory of the threat 11 Behaviours and attitudes 12 The damage caused by fraud 13 Strengths and weaknesses of our response 14 Section 2: Strategic direction 17 Our ambition 17 Strategic objectives 17 Priorities 18 Section 3: Strategic delivery 22 3 Fighting Fraud Together Collective statement of intent We recognise the benefits of working together to tackle a crime that affects us all and collectively costs us £38bn per annum. The criminals who attack us do not operate in silos and neither should we. Where we have worked together, we have delivered some significant results but there is much more that could be done. Fighting Fraud Together gives us a fresh impetus to make sure that this work is done. We, the organisations which are part of Fighting Fraud Together will: • Continue with measures to prevent, detect, disrupt and punish fraudsters both within our sectors and by working collaboratively across sectors, sharing intelligence, information and good practice • Commit to a new set of cross-cutting initiatives to provide fresh impetus in our fight against fraud • Widen our partnership working to involve other sectors who are less advanced in their approach to fighting fraud • Strengthen the institutional arrangements for co-ordinating our work • Ensure that our work is informed by the best intelligence
    [Show full text]
  • National Statistician's Review of Crime Statistics
    National Statistician’s Review of Crime Statistics: England and Wales June 2011 The National Statistician The National Statistician – a statutory office holder – is also the Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority Board and the Board’s principal adviser on: • the quality of official statistics • good practice in relation to official statistics, and • the comprehensiveness of official statistics. She is also the Head of the Government Statistical Service (GSS) which is a network of professional statisticians and their staff operating both within the Office for National Statistics and across more than 30 other government departments and agencies. Enquiries For enquiries about the content of this report please contact Debra Prestwood at [email protected] or telephone 0845 601 3034. Media contact: Luke Croydon: 020 7592 8635 Emergency on-call: 07867 906553 E-mail [email protected] © Crown Copyright 2011 The text in this document may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or email: [email protected] Contents Foreword 2 Chapter 1. Executive summary 3 Chapter 2. Recommendations 4 Chapter 3. Introduction 5 Chapter 4. Published crime statistics: issues and the way forward 7 Chapter 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2013-14 Annual Report and Accounts 2013-14 (For the Year Ended 31 March 2014)
    Home Office Annual Report and Accounts 2013-14 Annual Report and Home Office Annual Report and Accounts 2013-14 (For the year ended 31 March 2014) HC 21 Annual Report and Accounts 2013-14 (For the year ended 31 March 2014) Accounts presented to the House of Commons pursuant to Section 6(4) of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Annual Report presented to the House of Commons by Command of Her Majesty Annual Report and Accounts presented to the House of Lords by Command of Her Majesty Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 17 June 2014 HC 21 This is part of a series of departmental publications which, along with the Main Estimates 2014-15 and the document Public Expenditure: Statistical Analyses 2014, present the Government’s outturn for 2013-14 and planned expenditure for 2014-15. © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v.2. To view this licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/ or email [email protected] Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Direct Communications Unit, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF. Telephone: 020 7035 4848 (09:00-17:00 Mon-Fri) Fax: 020 7035 4745 Print ISBN 9781474105477 Web ISBN 9781474105484 Printed in the UK by the Williams
    [Show full text]
  • In the Implementation Processes for National Anti-Fraud Strategies at the Local Level: Aims, Ownership, and Impact
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Online Research @ Cardiff European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-019-09422-6 Exploring the ‘Shadows’ in the Implementation Processes for National Anti-fraud Strategies at the Local Level: Aims, Ownership, and Impact Michael Levi1 & Alan Doig2 # The Author(s) 2019 Abstract This article studies the development and implementation of a nationally drafted strategy for fraud in local government in England. The purpose, relevant to other countries which also face (or evade) problems of policy outreach, is to consider what is required to achieve effective implementation through three broad aspects: aims, ownership, and impact. There is a particular focus on the assessment of the strategy implementation process and what mechanisms translate strategies into effective delivery or what other factors may subvert that delivery. The empirical research draws on the UK government’s 2006 policy review on fraud and the consequential changes between then and 2019, including a number of fraud strategies initiated by the United Kingdom central government. To review implementation in practice, it focuses on the 2011 local government strategy and uses a local-level case study to assess issues concerning aims, ownership, and impact, as well as the effect of other nationally determined policies and agendas. It concludes that without an ‘owned’ strategy implementation process as a whole, national strategies concerning the prevention and policing of fraud in England in the twenty-first century have had—and continue to have—modest impact on practice on the ground at the local level.
    [Show full text]
  • National Fraud Initiative Report 2014
    National Fraud Initiative National Report June 2014 This document is EMBARGOED until 00:01 Thursday 12 June 2014 The Audit Commission’s role is to protect the public purse. We do this by appointing auditors to a range of local public bodies in England. We set the standards we expect auditors to meet and oversee their work. Our aim is to secure high-quality audits at the best price possible. We use information from auditors and published data to provide authoritative, evidence-based analysis. This helps local public services to learn from one another and manage the financial challenges they face. We also compare data across the public sector to identify where services could be open to abuse and help organisations fight fraud. Contents Summary ........................................................................................................... 2 Recommendations ............................................................................................ 5 What the Audit Commission will do .............................................................. 6 What the Cabinet Office will do .................................................................... 6 Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................... 7 Chapter 2: The NFI ............................................................................................ 8 Chapter 3: The NFI across the UK ................................................................. 12 Chapter 4: Results of the NFI in England .....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 'The Fight Against Fraud: a Critical Review and Comparative Analysis Of
    ‘The fight against fraud: A critical review and comparative analysis of the Labour and Conservative government’s anti-fraud policies in the United Kingdom’ Dr. Umut Turksen (Professor in Law & Business)1 and Dr. Nicholas Ryder (Professor in Financial Crime)2 1 Professor Umut Turksen, Kingston University, London. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Professor Nicholas Ryder, University of the West of England, Bristol. E-mail: [email protected] 1 “There is clear evidence that fraud is becoming the crime of choice for organised crime and terrorist funding. The response from law enforcement world-wide has not been sufficient. We need to bear down on fraud; to make sure that laws, procedures and resources devoted to combating fraud are fit for the modern age”.3 Introduction Initially, international efforts to tackle financial crimes have concentrated mainly on money laundering and terrorist financing. This is largely due to the United States of America (US) led ‘war on drugs’ and the ‘financial war on terrorism’. Fraud on the other hand has been placed lower in the list of public policy priorities and law enforcement efforts.4 Following the turbulent times we have experienced since the global economic downturn first in 1997 (triggered by the Asian crisis) and later in 2008 (triggered by the bursting of the US subprime mortgage bubble), there is evidence that politicians are changing their stance in tackling a number of fraudulent and malfeasant activities particularly in the banking and financial services sectors. Fraud can be defined as “persuading someone to part with something”,5 which includes “deceit or an intention to deceive”,6 or an “act of deception intended for personal gain or to cause a loss to another party” 7 and it “involves the perpetrator making personal gains or avoiding losses through the 3 Wright, R.
    [Show full text]