§ 32. Mr. Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire)What representations he has received concerning the closure of magistrates courts in East Anglia. [61255]
§ The Minister of State, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)I have recently received 12 representations from hon. Members, justices of the peace and other local interested parties, following the Cambridgeshire magistrates courts committee's determination to close the March magistrates courts with effect from 31 December 1998. I have previously received representations in relation to the Suffolk magistrates courts committee's decision to close magistrates courts in Suffolk.
§ Mr. LansleyI am grateful for that reply. Does the Minister agree that Haverhill in Suffolk is a good instance of a market town—it is in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for West Suffolk (Mr. Spring)—that is forecast to grow and should have local infrastructure, but that will see access to justice denied and the abandonment of an important part of the local infrastructure?
§ Mr. HoonI understand the hon. Gentleman's concern about Haverhill and other courthouses in Suffolk, but those decisions were taken by the Suffolk magistrates courts committee. It is curious that the hon. Gentleman should come here and make representations to a 143 London-based Minister that that Minister should override a local decision which surely was informed by all the factors that he advances on behalf of the case for Haverhill and other such towns.
§ Mr. Bob Russell (Colchester)Does the Minister agree that every magistrates courts committee is a quango? 144 Does he accept that those quangos are taking the decisions that they have taken, not at the behest of local people, but because the Government have starved the service of sufficient resources?
§ Mr. HoonI do not accept for one moment either that magistrates courts committees are quangos or that they are starved of financial resources.