HC Deb 29 June 1999 vol 334 cc134-6
32. Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham)

If he will make a statement about the continuing review and scrutiny of training for judges. [87547]

The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. Keith Vaz)

The Judicial Studies Board is an independent body, controlled by a board whose members are appointed by the Lord Chancellor. It is chaired by Lord Justice Waller, a Lord Justice of Appeal. For accounting purposes, it is treated as an advisory non-departmental public body. Its powers and obligations are set out in a memorandum of understanding with the Lord Chancellor's Department. The board produces and publishes a report to the Lord Chancellor each year.

Mr. Bercow

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that informative reply. I take this, my first, opportunity to congratulate him on his recent appointment.

Given the importance of training, both for individual judges and for the standing of the judiciary as a whole, will the hon. Gentleman assure the House that future training will be such as to ensure that we can avoid a repetition of the embarrassment that Lord Hoffmann recently inflicted on the judiciary by his failure to declare a relevant interest in the Pinochet case and then to withdraw from it?

Mr. Vaz

Their lordships have already ruled on that case. Obviously, the issue of declarations of interest is important and is dealt with in an important way by whoever sits on the Bench. I am certain that the training that the Judicial Studies Board initiates, both at the induction stages when new judges are appointed and in the three-year cycle, will include the whole issue of conflicts of interest, and any other potentially embarrassing and difficult points that may be raised.

Mrs. Ann Cryer (Keighley)

Would my hon. Friend like to comment on the measure of success his Department is having in moving towards judges being appointed from a much wider cross-section of society?

Mr. Vaz

It is always the Lord Chancellor's wish to ensure that judges are appointed from a wide section of society and it is right that, in the past year, 24 per cent. of the appointments made by my noble and learned Friend have been women. I am sure that my hon. Friend will join me in congratulating Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss on her appointment as the first woman president of the family division. It is important that the appointments should reflect society, but it is equally important that those appointed to the Bench should be appointed on merit. That is how my noble and learned Friend appoints people—they have to be of the highest quality. I believe that we have the best judiciary in the world and it is important that the merits tests are met.

Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath)

I join the Minister in his congratulations to Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss on her appointment as the first lady president of the family division. As the Minister said, the British judiciary is the finest in the world, but I am sure that he agrees that there would be grave concern throughout the legal profession and the country if there were to be any sign of the politicisation of the judiciary in the future. Will he confirm, for himself and his noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, that the Government have no intention of politicising the judiciary? Will he further confirm that he recognises the sanctity of the separation of powers doctrine so that we will not see any interference by Parliament under this Government in the freedom of the judiciary?

Mr. Vaz

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his first appearance in his new role at the Dispatch Box during Question Time. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that, of course, the judiciary must be apolitical. My noble and learned Friend the Lord Chancellor wishes to ensure the integrity and impartiality of those appointed to the judiciary and he has made sure that that has been the case.

Mr. Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock)

Is the Minister satisfied that the training and instruction of judges provides them with sufficient sensitivity to arrange their private passions and interests to coincide with the natural holiday time of the courts? Given that many jurors find that they lose pay, their businesses suffer or they miss out on tickets to Wimbledon, does he share my dismay that one of the learned judges has put his passion for Wimbledon above his obligations to the court? If Madam Speaker were to be invited to Wimbledon, I know that she would fulfil her obligation to be here. Can we have a rap on the knuckles for judges who put other things before their duties?

Mr. Vaz

My hon. Friend—he is a good friend—was present at the European selection meeting when I lost by a single vote, but I have no spare tickets for him. Judge Hooton, the judge to whom my hon. Friend has referred, had booked his annual leave some time ago. It had been estimated by the lawyers that the case, which he was due to have started on Monday, would last for three to four days. At the outset of the trial, the lawyers informed the judge, without providing the court with any prior notice, that they anticipated that the case would last five or six days. On that basis, the judge was forced to adjourn the case. In my view, it is disappointing that the judge should have been placed in that position.