HC Deb 18 November 1996 vol 285 cc693-4
32. Mr. Barnes

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many representations he received in the last parliamentary Session from hon. Members that were forwarded for answer to the agencies attached to his Department. [2868]

Mr. Streeter

In the last parliamentary Session, 642 representations from hon. Members were forwarded for answer to the agencies for which the Lord Chancellor is responsible.

Mr. Barnes

Quite correctly, Members of Parliament are not allowed to approach the courts, as that would represent interference in the operation of law and order. Traditionally they could approach the Lord Chancellor, but now in hundreds of cases it seems that many of our queries are being passed to the Court Service. Surely that suggests that that is one area at least in which the agency arrangements go too far. Our constituents expect us to be able to approach the top—the Lord Chancellor—in connection with court cases and get a response from him.

Mr. Streeter

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. There has been no change in ministerial accountability and responsibility to the House. In my opinion, it is quite correct that letters about specific court cases should be sent by the person with the day-to-day management responsibility—the chief executive of the Court Service. The hon. Gentleman has been a Member for nine years and surely he knows by now that, if he is unhappy with a response from the agencies, he can contact Ministers at any time. Once again I find myself saying to a Labour Member that my door is always open.

Mr. Bernard Jenkin

Would my hon. Friend agree to accept representations on the activities of judges? Is he aware of increasing concern in the House that judges are getting involved in political matters in judgments where they seem to be making up the law as they go along? Is he aware of a recent case in which a judge appeared on a television programme to campaign against my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary's legislation? Does he agree that that is beyond the remit of a judge, who should be answerable to Parliament through the laws that we pass?

Mr. Streeter

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his timing. He makes an important point, because it is for Members of the House to legislate and it is for the judiciary to implement the law of the land. However, we welcome a lively debate, including the involvement of members of the judiciary, and we do not seek to stifle debate within our party, as, sadly, Labour Members have done in their own party in the past three years.

Forward to