HC Deb 30 June 1969 vol 786 cc29-30
37. Mr. Scott-Hopkins

asked the Attorney-General why he has issued instructions that no one owning land or employing labour shall be appointed as a justice of the peace ; and if he will make a statement.

The Attorney-General

I have not issued any such instructions, nor has my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, who is the authority responsible for the appointment of justices of the peace.

Mr. Scott-Hopkins

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the Lord Chancellor has made several speeches in the past few months saying that he will refuse to appoint the gentleman concerned? Can we have a categorical denial from the learned Attorney-General that this will not be the practice in the future?

The Attorney-General

I have already given an emphatic denial. It is the case that it is the policy of my noble Friend to appoint to commissions of the peace persons from different sections of the local community, and particularly from among those who are wage earners. This policy is not new, but it has been applied rather more vigorously in recent years.

Mr. Oakes

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware how disappointing his reply is to many hon. Members on this side of the House? If he had adopted this policy it would be the reversal of the policy of successive Governments for centuries. Will he tell us when it is proposed to pay magistrates in accordance with the decision of this House in the Bill?

The Attorney-General

The important fact is that magistrates should be selected for their competence to do the job. But it is fitting and proper that benches should now represent a cross-section of the community as a whole. On my hon. Friend's point about the payment of justices, when the economic situation permits the undertakings given will be fulfilled.

Mr. Iremonger

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On reflection, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply to Question 36, I beg to give notice that I will seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman is one Question too late.