§ 24. Mr. Willisasked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will seek powers to prevent the appointment of members of the Scottish judiciary to committees set up by political parties.
§ 25. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will seek powers to ensure that Scottish members of the judiciary do not engage in party political controversy.
§ Mr. RossI refer my hon. Friends to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Rutherglen (Mr. Gregor Mackenzie) on 16th October.—[Vol. 770, c. 377.]
§ Mr. WillisIs my right hon. Friend aware that the reply he gave last week was certainly not borne out by the rather disgraceful events at the beginning of August when it was shown quite clearly that the Scottish judiciary did not appear to be aware of the generally accepted convention of the constitution? Is my right hon. Friend aware that there has been much discussion since as to what arrangements exist to enable this to be enforced?
§ Mr. RossI think there is no need for any statutory powers to enforce this. I think it is now generally recognised, and the behaviour on the whole of Scottish judiciary bears this out. In the particular instance to which my right hon. Friend referred there has been a satisfactory conclusion with the withdrawal of the acceptance of the gentleman concerned.
§ Mr. HamiltonWill my right hon. Friend not consider the setting up of some commission to investigate appointment to the judiciary in Scotland, which is in the nature of a large-scale racket?
§ Mr. RossNo, I do not think so. I think the procedure for appointing 1271 judges in Scotland is well established and I am not aware that that has led in practice to any large-scale racket.
§ Mr. David SteelWill the Secretary of State reconsider his answer to the last question, as it is not so much a racket that we are concerned about but the connection between party political appointments to the bench which is worrying the Scottish public? That is the point.
§ Mr. RossI am aware that the public accept the judiciary to be impartial and independent and I am satisfied that the judiciary accept this.