HC Deb 19 May 1971 vol 817 cc1406-8
The Lord Advocate

I beg to move Amendment No. 2, in page 9, line 5, after 'If', insert: 'for the purpose of securing the efficient organisation and administration of the sheriff courts, and after consultation with the Lord President of the Court of Session'. The House will appreciate that subsection (4) of the Clause gives very wide powers to the Secretary of State to move a sheriff from one part of the country to another, provided it can be justified on grounds of administrative efficiency. We have always regarded a provision of this nature as essential. This flexibility is implicit in the Report of the Grant Committee. We have always regarded this flexibility—achieving the full and proper use of shrieval experience—as being essential. On the other hand, we have always recognised that it is a novel power for Scotland which the House would like to feel entirely satisfied about before the Bill goes to another place.

The question which has arisen on the subsection and which has arisen in more general terms on the Bill is to what extent we can interfere with the relationship between Executive and judiciary without possibly doing damage to or possibly risking the independence of the judiciary. I was indebted to the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Murray) for his views in Committee on this very important issue. At column 99 of the OFFICIAL REPORT Of the Committee proceedings on 22nd April 1 made reference to the fact that we were reconsidering the provision in what was then Clause 13(4) in the light of the representations made with a view to deciding what qualification should appropriately be put in the subsection.

The qualifications which the Amendment seeks to make to the subsection are twofold. One is to write in the words for the purpose of securing the efficient organisation and administration of the sheriff courts. That is the first criterion which must be satisfied before the Secretary of State can exercise this power. It may not be strictly necessary, but we felt that for the avoidance of doubt it was advisable to insert this clear proviso in the subsection. We have decided that the other qualification which should be introduced is a provision for consultation with the head of the judiciary in Scotland. We must naturally be very sensitive about the relationship struck between the Executive and the judiciary and we felt that as we were dealing with judges and, in certain circumstances, requiring a sheriff to move from one part of the country to another, it would not be inappropriate to involve the head of the judiciary.

I have reason to believe that this proposal might meet with the approval of the shrieval bench. I have discussed it with the Lord President of the Court of Session, who is directly involved in the Amendment, and I commend it to the House as being a step taken to meet some of the concern expressed in Committee, particularly by the hon. and learned Member for Leith.

Mr. Ronald King Murray

We welcome the Amendment and express our satisfaction at the two points mentioned by the Lord Advocate. It is desirable that the purpose should clearly be stated in Clause 14(4). It is always helpful where a limited purpose is sought to be provided in an Act of Parliament to have it spelled out explicitly if there is a risk, as there has been here, of people thinking that the powers taken by the Executive are excessive. The Amendment makes clear that only the limited purpose of securing the efficient organisation and administration of the sheriff courts is sought. Therefore, there should be no possibility of doubt that any greater power is being sought by the Executive or any sinister attempt being made to interfere with the judicial function.

We welcome the constitutional measure of spelling out consultation with the Lord President of the Court of Session, and using his office as a bulwark between the Executive and the judiciary. In our discussions in the early stages of the Bill, it became obvious that it was a difficult and delicate matter to deal with these problems, and the solution which the Government have reached is a satisfactory one.

Amendment agreed to.

Forward to