§ 32. Mr. HinchliffeTo ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will review the procedure for closure of court buildings. [21924]
§ Mr. Jonathan EvansThe Lord Chancellor's Department has responsibility for the Crown and county court estate, and has no plans to change its procedure for considering court closure. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Department has no role in initiating the closure of magistrates courts, which falls to the local magistrates courts committee.
§ Mr. HinchliffeThe Minister will be aware that Wakefield Crown court was closed two years ago. As that building is still in the ownership of the Government and has not yet been sold, can he give me an assurance that the building will be properly maintained, because concern has been expressed about its fabric? It is one of the finest buildings in Wakefield. Bearing it in mind that, since its 17 closure, it has been used nearly 300 times for court purposes, will he review the formal closure programme agreed two years ago?
§ Mr. EvansIt is important to distinguish the cases that are dealt with at Wakefield Crown court from the generality of cases dealt with at Wakefield county court. The county court deals with a range of civil business and will continue to do so, whereas the cases dealt with at Wakefield Crown court are those transferred to it from the Leeds area—some 262 cases according to my latest information. I am keen to ensure that the fabric of all buildings within the Government's estate are properly maintained. In view of the points raised by the hon. Gentleman, I will look into the matter.
§ Sir Donald ThompsonWhen my hon. Friend goes to Wakefield to look into the matter, perhaps he could pop on to Calder Valley to pay me a visit at the same time, because we in Calder Valley would like to thank him and the Lord Chancellor for their recent decision on the magistrates committee in Calderdale. Small market town courts are important; if we lose them, we lose a cadre of solicitors and associated people who have known a town and district for generations. That would also affect the speed of justice, but law's delay is less irksome if we keep as many courts as possible.
§ Mr. EvansI am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind remarks in relation to the recent meeting that the Lord Chancellor and I had with him to discuss the organisation of magistrates courts in his area. I draw the distinction, as I did in reply to the hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Hinchliffe), about the responsibility of the Lord Chancellor's Department in considering the future of county court premises as against the magistrates courts, but I give an assurance to the House that the factors that influence the Lord Chancellor's Department are primarily geared towards improving the service to court users and that, in those circumstances, financial considerations do not overrule any other considerations in relation to court premises.
§ Mr. BoatengIs the Minister aware that the funding arrangements and the formula applied by the Lord Chancellor's Department in calculating grant to local magistrates courts committees is responsible for many of the closures of courthouses and courtrooms and the laying off of court staff, especially those responsible for security and the collection of awards made to victims of crime? Is he aware of the widespread anxiety on both sides of the House about the impact on the morale of the Court Service and on the interests of justice? Imposing Treasury-driven inflexible rules on the magistrates court system has led to incalculable harm and denial of justice.
§ Mr. EvansI am aware of the fact that the magistrates courts committees are funded on a formula basis, and that is a necessary and essential product of the fact that we decided, following the Police and Magistrates' Courts Act 1994, to retain the independence of those magistrates courts committees.
When I had the opportunity of speaking to the council of the magistrates courts committees but a matter of days after my appointment to this post, I said that the Lord Chancellor's Department was happy to examine any 18 anomalies in relation to the formula basis. In my judgment, the current operation of the formula properly assesses the rate of grant that should be given to most magistrates courts, but clearly some courts are disadvantaged by the way in which the formula works out and, as I said to the council, if the hon. Gentleman can propose any change in the formula that properly tackles that, I shall be happy to examine it.