Set-piece Government proposals to beef up the UK's record on prosecuting white-collar criminals have won broad backing from City lawyers, with the profession conceding that the current regime often fails to make the grade.

The latest Legal Week/ EJ Legal Big Question survey found a clear majority of commercial lawyers backed key proposals issued in July as part of the Government's long-running fraud review, which is being championed by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith.

The proposal to establish a new financial court jurisdiction within the High Court received the most support from respondents, with 44% of those surveyed expressing "strong" support and an additional 52% also backing the idea. Only 4% of the panel of more than 100 partners were against the initiative.

Calls in the review for tougher maximum sentences also received support.

The majority of lawyers questioned felt that, once a conviction was achieved, the maximum sentence available should be increased from 10 years to 14. Sixty percent supported the proposition, while an extra 19% "strongly supported" it. This compares with 15% in opposition and 6% that strongly oppose the idea.

Herbert Smith litigation partner Ted Greeno told Legal Week: "Currently, our sentences are much less than those in the US. It would serve as a good deterrent, but it has to be looked at in the context of other sentences – for instance, crimes of violence should have a higher sentence."

Keith Oliver, senior partner at fraud boutique Peters & Peters, is a strong advocate of reform. He said: "From a sanction point of view, the greater and more numerous the penalties available to pursue and bring to justice an offender and bring about the earliest possible recovery of the proceeds, the better."

Opinions were more spilt over how able the UK was at tackling white-collar crime, with 42% stating the country had a poor record, compared with 35% who said it was "adequate" and 17% who said it was "good". A further 4% said it was "excellent", while 2% said it was "appalling".

Lawyers were much clearer over which country has the best record in bringing white-collar criminals to justice, with 77% claiming the US had a superior system to the UK.

The differing approaches to white-collar crime have been in the spotlight since last month's controversial 'Nat-West Three' extradition of a trio of UK bankers to face US fraud charges relating to Enron.

The case, which has sparked a storm over US/UK extradition arrangements, is set to draw on plea-bargaining with US prosecutors using evidence from several convicted Enron executives who are set to testify against the three UK bankers.

On proposals to introduce plea bargaining in UK fraud trials, the Big Question panel also voted in favour, with 71% agreeing, including 13% who "strongly" supported such moves.

Peter & Peters' heavyweight head of fraud, Monty Raphael, said: "Our system is inadequate in a few important areas. The biggest issue is that there is no requirement to report fraud.

"We also suffer from a lack of resources. It is absolutely essential that fraud is placed high up on the list of policing priorities."

Russell Jones & Walker head of fraud and regulatory investigations Rod Fletcher commented: "The US system allows a sledgehammer to crack a nut, so statistically it is more effective. Whether it is as fair for the prosecution and defence, I would question."