 Y cifrediau gyda'r cynhyrchu yng nghymru a'r syniadau cyfrain, perthins i fynd yn ymdegol gyda'r sbeik사, ac mae'n mynd i'r cynhyrchu yng nghymru. Felly byddwn i'n digwydd ystafell o'r Gymru, ond'n digwydd i'r cynhyrchu'r cyd-degwyrnol, a'r gyfaniec favourite na'r Gymru. Rydyn ni'n bod yn llai gyda cyfrifio yn y UK. Rydyn ni'n cyfaniec favourite na'r gymuned, ac wedi cymryd yn gymryd, felly wedi eu bod yn yn wedi ei wneud. The new roles and responsibilities of the NCA are very different to any agency that has gone before in the UK, are relevant to many areas of the public and private sectors, if not all of them. With the first agency in the UK with a mandate to lead and coordinate the whole of the law enforcement effort against serious and organised crime. So whilst serious organised crime agencies some of you may be aware of has come to us, so have a number of other organisations, but there are some really big differences. So unlike here in the Republic we've got 45 local police forces in the UK and a number of national agencies. One of the key differences for us is to enable me to lead the overall response. I've got the power to direct local police forces. Constitutionally that's a huge change for the UK. Interestingly a year on I haven't had to do that once. I rather hoped that was going to be the position because the reality is colleagues in police forces and other agencies don't come to work to avoid tackling problems, they come to work to deal with problems and what we've focused on is building a partnership and making judgements together based on intelligence. And my sense is having the power to direct a police force is more important than actually directing. I think it creates an environment which is we together right the way from the local through to the global need to work effectively together and the NCA needs to focus on what it brings that a local police force can't bring. Whether that's high-end technical capabilities, whether it's our overseas network or it's the ability to bring police forces and agencies together. That I think is about partnerships, it's about reputation, it's about trust, it's about sharing intelligence, not about bossing people around. And so far one year in that's worked very effectively. And of course our partnerships aren't just about law enforcement. So I checked in earlier on about the importance of the private sector. So the responsibilities that we've got around cyber crime, organized crime, child exploitation, economic crime and borders, in all of that never mind us operating as an agency in isolation. If law enforcement tries to operate in isolation we are bound to fail. If we just look at the challenge that we face from cyber, whether it's access to capabilities, access to information or how we actually reach out to victims we can't do it without the private sector. Immediately some colleagues will then become very concerned about the risk of working in those ways. I think the risk of not working well with the private sector and others is much more significant. We're going to need to change the way in which we think and work. NCA officers can be designated with the powers of a constable, a customs officer and an immigration officer. And the way in which is structured the organization is 85% of our officers are either directly tackling criminals or directly supporting those people who tackle criminals. So the culture that we're developing, albeit we're a government department, the culture we're developing is very much a policing and law enforcement action focus, not a thinking and writing policies focus. This is about locking up criminals and relentlessly disrupting what they do. We've got an international network and we hold specialist capabilities that we share with our partners and we're investing in these to ensure that we're in the best possible position to lead the UK's fight against serious and organized crime. So we're a capabilities organization. It seems to me little pointing having a national agency that replicates what the police are able to do probably better than we are. They understand local communities, have the right local partnerships, have a mandate with a trust and confidence of local people to do a whole range of law enforcement activities. But one wouldn't imagine they want to deploy liaison officers in Afghanistan or Colombia, for instance, or here in the Republic where we've got liaison officer. That's some of what we do through the international network. High-end cyber capabilities, how we use comms data, how we provide niche investigative skills that would otherwise be very difficult for the police to access. So the way we're developing the agency is all about capabilities, all about making those capabilities available to the police and law enforcement. It's not about capacity. It's not more of the same. It has to be unique and niche. So whether it's cyber-enabled fraud affecting corporations or the degradation of communities we live in as individuals, serious organized crime affects every single one of us. Better public understanding of how serious organized crime impacts on our lives is vital to agencies like the NCA. Therefore, I'm determined that we're open and transparent and we explain what it means for real people. But I've chosen to speak today on a theme which some people do not want to look quite so directly in the eye. If we don't, though, we only add to the problem. That theme is corruption and it's precisely because it's so uncomfortable to talk about that a mature, open dialogue is so vital. There isn't as far as I know a single-grade definition of corruption, not least because its scale and nature can vary so widely. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development defines corruption as the abuse of public or private office for personal gain. Transparency international's definition goes further and consider its impact too. Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It hurts everyone who depends on the integrity of people in a position of authority. But those definitions recognize that corruption involves an individual putting their own interests first and compromising the welfare of others in the process. Former Secretary General of the United Nations, Cofi Annan, was succinct and articulate in his description of the global implications of corruption. Corruption undermines democracy and rule of law. It leads to violations of human rights. It distorts markets. It erodes the quality of life and allows organized crime, terrorism and other threats to human security to flourish. Corruption hurts the poor disproportionately by diverting funds intended for development. Undermining a government's ability to provide basic services. Feeding inequality and injustice and a discouraging foreign aid investment. I think that's a pretty devastating list of what corruption means when it's quite easy sometimes to default to thinking of corruption in terms of its tactical effect, its local effect. Those are very, very significant and there are issues given the sort of things that all of us in this room do that will affect us all and concern us all. Those definitions describe the big picture but what does corruption look like in the real world? The UK's daily telegraph exposure in 2009 of Members of Parliament's actual and alleged misuse of expenses made headlines for months. It resulted in sackings, deselections, public apologies, repayments, prosecutions, prison sentences for serving members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. I did a search online to find out about some more recent cases that we might want to think about. In Hong Kong, five people are on trial in what is believed, described in Hong Kong's biggest ever corruption case. Two of the defendants control Asia's biggest property development company, one is a banker and one is Hong Kong's former chief secretary. In the US, the political career of State Governor Robert MacDonald ended last month when he was found guilty of corruption in a trial that Washington Post said seemed to grip the nation. A district attorney's office in Georgia is currently prosecuting its own chief executive for using his power to solicit campaign contributions from companies who had contracts with the county. In March this year, the US Department of Justice announced that it frozen $500 million believed to have been illegally obtained by former Nigerian leader, Sani Abatru. Some newspaper reports have alleged that Abatru and his family stole as much as £5 billion from Nigerian coffers. There are other examples of this kind of international corruption linked to the Arab Spring and the crisis in Ukraine. In the UK last month, four men were sentenced after a six-year investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. The men bribed state officials in Iraq and Indonesia to secure contracts for a product supplied by their company. That product contained a compound banned since 2000 in the UK because of its links with severe neurological damage. I mean, I can't think of a stronger example of people putting their own interests above the interests of others actually trading in something that causes huge significant damage to people who may well be very vulnerable. Just two weeks ago, the British company GlaxoSmithcline was fined £297 million after one of its subsidiaries was found guilty of bribing doctors in China to prescribe their company's medicines. The company has published an apology to the Chinese government and its people and three of its executives now face up to four years in jail. Early this year, you may also have seen media coverage of the NCA's ongoing investigation into football match fixing in England. In June, three men were found guilty of trying to manipulate the score lines of matches and profit by betting on the outcomes. Two more men will go to trial next year. Now, sometimes people miss the real corrosive effect of that sort of criminality. So a big part of the UK economy is betting and gaming. If people don't have confidence in betting and gaming that actually won't engage in the UK industry, that will cost jobs, prosperity and has reputational damage. So all of this flows back to ultimately the damage it has on real people and the reputation or the reality of the state. We, you and I, are fortunate to belong to societies where corruption is not endemic or accepted as a way of life as it is in some countries. The UK was ranked 14th out of 177 countries by Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index in 2013. Denmark and New Zealand were joint top. Afghanistan, North Korea and Somalia were the joint worst performers. Typically, the better scoring countries have high levels of press freedom, open budget processes and strong accountability mechanisms. Perhaps it is because corrupt practice is still the exception in the UK and Ireland and because our own baseline standards are so high that instances of corruption are all the more shocking when they're exposed. I've just outlined some examples of corporate greed and political ambition, distorting decision making and leading to corrupt practice. But of course, for me and some other colleagues in the room, there are some uncomfortable examples which are much closer to home. The most dangerous organised criminals will go to significant lengths to target susceptible individuals in positions of influence in order to evade arrest and prosecution, hide their profits and keep their criminal networks sustained. The brutal truth is that criminals succeed in fraudulently obtaining genuine UK passports, for example. They could not do that unless there were corrupt counter signatures in positions of trust. It's simply not possible. Criminals smuggle contraband into prisons and run their criminal enterprises from behind bars and could not without complicit prison officers. They may be a small minority but there are accountants and lawyers who use seemingly legitimate businesses to facilitate criminal money laundering. A figures published in August show that over the past five years an average of 92 officers from UK police forces have been investigated each year for corruption allegations including selling information and interfering with criminal investigations. Think of other big law enforcement headlines from the last couple of years. Now, this is deliberately UK centric. I hope it means something too if it doesn't, we can deal with it in question, but Stephen Lawrence murder investigation, now allegations that corruption was involved in the problems of that investigation. Hillsborough, 96 people killed in a huge disaster, now allegations that was corrupt practice around the response to that. Mitchellgate. I'm asking almost every interview I do what I think about law enforcement's reputation with the public. This is a huge issue in the UK. The 92 police officers investigated for corruption on average in each of the past five years represents a fraction of the UK's police officer population of around 152,000. To be precise, one in every 1,650. And yet you could assume from public and media perceptions of police corruption that proportion was much higher. The problem of course is that we can be certain there are others that have not even been counted and are who's still operating under the radar. That is where the public concern is focused. It does not matter that some of the officers investigated are proved innocent. It does not matter that the UK's regime for identifying and managing corruption within law enforcement is amongst the best anywhere in the world. Trust is earned very slowly and is destroyed in a second. Here then is the issue for us. Any corruption by those with authority damages trust so fundamentally that every single one of us is undermined by it. So I'd extend the list of impacts and suggest that one of the corrosive effects of corruption is its ability to damage public confidence and in a law enforcement context public confidence is absolutely everything. Because if people aren't confident in us when they're frightened, when they're feeling vulnerable, they won't tell us about what's happened. If they don't tell us about what's happened we can't deal with it. If people don't believe us and trust us that's fundamental to achieving our mission. It isn't about a warm glow, it's about delivering public safety and security and we need the confidence of the public. Right or wrong the perception matters just as much as the reality. An attempt to change the perception with statistics that proves things aren't quite as bad as they appear to be not only misses the point I think it makes it worse. I'm immensely proud of the people that I've worked with during my entire career and I'm immensely proud of the people that I work alongside now. The majority of them are honourable dedicated individuals who do the opposite of what I'm talking about today. They make personal sacrifices every single day because they believe in what they do. They put the public the good first and they put themselves last exactly as they should do. Their dedication is eclipsed by the tiny minority of their colleagues who make self-interest their priority. Public confidence is worth protecting. So how best do we protect it? Of course I recognise the argument. I don't agree with it but I recognise it. There could be a fine line between building public confidence by sharing and damaging it by sharing too much. I understand the fear that if the public sees and hears so much about corruption in the bodies they are supposed to trust the damage may be irreversible. But surely we do not really protect people more effectively by keeping things from them. In seeking to retain public confidence the danger is that we default to dealing with corruption within our own organisations behind closed doors in secret. And however virtuous our motivations for doing that may be if we keep things to ourselves we simply look like we're complicit. We look as if we're saving face and that's more important than the truth and because the perception matters just as much as the reality the reality is we make things worse. It is my belief that we can only deal effectively with corruption if we are open about it. So for me there are two strands. The first is effective coordination of the action we take collectively in law enforcement, professionals, regulators to address global corruption. Coordination is made more important by the fact that within the UK no single department or organisation is leading on tackling corruption. Responsibility is spread across policy, investigatory, prosecutorial and regulatory agencies depending on the type and level of corruption identified. The law enforcement response is also split. The serious fraud office investigates and prosecutes cases of serious and complex fraud, bribery and corruption. The city of London police's overseas anti-corruption unit investigates international bribery cases involving UK companies or individuals in developing countries. London's metropolitan police proceeds of corruption unit investigates politically exposed persons who have laundered money in or through the UK from developing countries and the creation of the economic crime command within the national crime agency now means that there is a team to lead support and coordinate the multi agency response to both domestic and international threats and that means that we're going to change the way that we do this. For example domestically the economic crime command is working with the home office and local authorities to toughen processes around procurement related fraud. Internationally we're leading ongoing law enforcement efforts to tackle and support the Ukraine government in identifying and recovering stolen assets. We're also providing operational support to some of the serious fraud offices international corruption bribery investigations and we manage the register of all international bribery cases being taken forward by UK law enforcement. This is about bringing together of our collective response. The NCA's UK financial intelligence unit now provides a dedicated intelligence function for police forces, serious fraud office, crime prosecution service and others through an international corruption intelligence cell. Clearly effective partnership is at the center of all of this and there are several changes to the landscape which are supporting this partnership. Government has established an inter ministerial group on anti-corruption and has announced a full review of the UK law enforcement response to domestic and international corruption which will be completed by the end of this calendar year. The NCA's economic crime command has worked with a serious fraud office, City of London police, Crown office for Scotland, Ministry of Defence police to negotiate a revised structure for the coordination of all new and ongoing international bribery cases. That process went live in July. Economic crime command is also promoting a broader approach which recognises that the pursuit is just one of the means of combating corruption. I think it's very easy and I have to challenge myself on this all the time as a law enforcement officer to default to the best solution is pursuing criminals and bringing them to justice. The reality is in multi-jurisdictional work sometimes you have to focus on disruption and prevention rather than pursuit because pursuit is sometimes the most effective option. Sustained impact will only be delivered if we take parallel action to protect victims, systems and processes from threats. Using disruptive tactics to prevent criminal activity and help individuals and organisations to be better prepared for the impact of economic crime. I said there are two strands to dealing effectively with corruption by being open about it. The second is the action we take within our own organisations to lead by example. The bribery act in the UK has created a new offence for commercial organisations of failing to prevent people associated with them from bribing another person on their behalf. The defence against this is being able to prove that adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery. There is guidance for commercial organisations of all sizes and sectors on what those procedures should look like. Those of us working in law enforcement need to manage the threat of corruption in our own organisations as we do in our wider investigations. Within the NCA our anti-corruption unit tackles corruption directed at the agency and I guess the same is true for the guards. We are under constant attack from people trying to corrupt our systems, our officers, our teams. It's literally a day-to-day battle to see off these people. It recognises that organised crime groups and others will seek to penetrate our agency and it works hard to identify and investigate corruption within the agency. The NCA has a code which sets out the values and behaviours that we expect from every one of our officers. It emphasises integrity, acting with the highest standards of professionalism and transparency, being truthful, open and accountable for our actions. The expectation of every officer in the NCA is they put the public first, the agency second and themselves third and that's non-negotiable and it's absolutely expected of me and all of our leaders that we demonstrate that in everything that we do. As director general these are the values I'm embedding in our agency. This is the NCA way and our efforts start at home in our own agency. So in closing, on sentencing the defendants in the serious fraud office case that I mentioned earlier the judge said, corruption in this company was endemic, institutionalised and ingrained but decisions are made by human minds. Corruption is not faceless, it's not a nameless act, it's not victimous. Behind every corrupt decision is a person who can make choices. The damage may be to corporate reputations even to countries reputations but individuals are the key both in terms of those committing corrupt acts and the way each of us chooses to respond as a result. Closing I'd like to give you an example of an individual response which I find particularly inspirational. Transparency International Italy gave its annual Ambrosia award this year to Michele Langoury. Michele was a Naples police officer who dedicated his life to investigating the people behind the so-called triangle of death. This area north of Naples is home to piles of dumped and burning toxic waste including asbestos and chemical dies. Locally the belief is that the waste dumps and fires are the results of deals done between manufacturers and one of Italy's main mafia groups. Firms wanted to cut their costs by getting rid of their waste turn to this group which disposes of it illegally. Most likely making substantial amounts of money in the process which then supports further criminal activity and further harm. Langoury died in January this year but he was interviewed before his death and he said I could not pretend not to see. If someone was asked what do you think your father's message would be to others who are facing entrenched corruption he said it should be the responsibility of everyone to report wrongdoing if they see it and they should be able to do this without fear. Keeping silent does not help. I would add I think keeping silent is just as bad. Keeping silent does not help. Let's not be defensive. We need to talk about this. I know it's difficult. Thank you very much for listening to what I've had to say.