§ 28. Mr. Donald AndersonTo ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to reduce delays in civil appeals. [500]
Mr. John M. TaylorThree additional lord justices were appointed earlier in the year and other measures intended to improve efficiency have been introduced in the civil appeals division. The Lord Chancellor is considering making further additional appointments.
§ Mr. AndersonEven in the light of those welcome developments, the Minister will know of last week's warning by the Master of the Rolls in his annual review that delays are an affront to justice. Does the hon. Gentleman not find it scandalous that the process takes perhaps an average of three years in London from the time of setting down to trial, and thereafter perhaps another 18 to 19 months for more than 70 per cent. of cases to reach a hearing in the Court of Appeal?
Mr. TaylorFor 70 per cent. of appeals, the period from setting down to hearing is 18 to 19 months. The hear-by period for cases involving children, which are given higher priority, is now five months. Having said that, I am not at all complacent about the figures. My Department naturally pays the most careful and respectful attention to the observations of the Master of the Rolls. The Lord Chancellor keeps the situation under review. It is under review; we are not content.
§ Mr. HawkinsDoes my hon. Friend agree that to everyone concerned with the legal process justice delayed is justice denied? Will he take this opportunity to comment on the progress with Lord Woolf's reviews and recommendations to see whether some of them may assist in reducing delays in civil appeals?
Mr. TaylorI thank my hon. Friend for that observation. Lord Woolf's second and final report, which is keenly anticipated, will, I hope, give us the full range of guidance that we have looked forward to resulting from Lord Woolf's admirable work. My hon. Friend will know that one of the recommendations is already in place: the increase in the small claim limit from £1,000 to £3,000 in non-personal injury cases.
§ Mr. MaclennanWhy is the Master of the Rolls so angry?
Mr. TaylorI am not sure that the hon. Gentleman is the least petulant Member of the House. I do not think that those words lie very well on his lips at all.
§ Mr. BoatengWhat is the Minister's response to Lord Woolf's concern at the increasing back-door privatisation 332 of the Court Service through the private finance initiative? Why has he not responded to Lord Woolf's challenge to consult the judiciary on that issue? What is the benefit to the consumer and the citizen of hiving off large chunks of the Court Service—its administrative and quasi-judicial functions—to multinational companies? Is it not right to say that British justice should be in the hands of the British public and that market forces have no role to play in the fair and proper administration of justice?
Mr. TaylorThe judiciary will be consulted. The trade unions will be consulted, and at their request the consultation period has been put back from 17 November to 21 December. Having the best possible modern kit in the courts to help with their administration is not inimical to good justice; it will help good justice.