HC Deb 23 February 1956 vol 549 cc556-7
31. Sir F. Medlicott

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to extend the age limit for jury service to 70.

Major Lloyd-George

No, Sir. The proposal is one on which different views may be held, but even if I thought it right to raise the age limit I could not hold out any prospect of legislation on the subject in the near future.

Sir F. Medlicott

Is not the Home Secretary aware that between the ages of 60 and 70 judgment, perception, intelligence and understanding are often at their ripest and best—

Mr. Shinwell

The hon. Member should speak for himself.

Sir F. Medlicott

—and a very large number of retired people who are thus well qualified would be glad to have the opportunity of serving the community in this way?

Major Lloyd-George

Speaking for myself, I am most grateful to my hon. Friend for the limits he has chosen, but there are many things relating to juries which would need legislation and certainly need examination with regard to numbers, ages, and so forth. I cannot possibly promise legislation in the near future.

Mr. Shinwell

Does not the Home Secretary agree that in my case, having reached the mature age of 70, I compare favourably in perception, judgment, intelligence and other qualities with the hon. Member for Norfolk, Central (Sir F. Medlicott)?

Sir F. Medlicott

Nevertheless, may I ask my right hon. and gallant Friend to explain the inconsistency whereby jurors have to retire at 60, stipendiary magistrates can go on until they are 72, and judges of the High Court can go on for ever?

Major Lloyd-George

This is a matter which obviously must be looked at by a committee, because there are many other questions than age. During the war, as an emergency measure, the age limit was raised to 65. Obviously, this is a question which needs examination. I cannot go further than that at the moment.