HC Deb 09 September 2003 vol 410 cc151-2
3. Annabelle Ewing (Perth)

What representations he has received concerning the proposals for a UK supreme court. [128445]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mrs. Anne McGuire)

The proposals for a supreme court are currently the subject of consultation by my right hon. and noble Friend the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs. The consultation includes a wide range of Scottish interests. Although no responses have yet been received, the consultation does not close until 7 November.

Annabelle Ewing

I thank the Minister for her answer, but is it not the case that the role of the Secretary of State for Scotland in protecting the integrity of Scots law must be viewed as compromised from the outset, as his boss at the Department for Constitutional Affairs will have the final say. Would today not be a good opportunity to support calls to end the anomaly whereby in post-devolution Scotland final appellate jurisdiction over Scots civil law lies south of the border?

Mrs. McGuire

I like to take the hon. Lady seriously, but sometimes it is very difficult, because every contribution she makes in the House is predicated on the fact that she wants to rip Scotland out of the partnership of the United Kingdom. I would advise her, if she wishes to make comments such as those she has made today about civil jurisdiction, that she has ample opportunity to do so during the consultation period. I would remind her that the consultation has been welcomed in Scotland by the Lord Advocate and senior members of the judiciary. I am sure that any contribution that they make to the consultation will be taken seriously by the UK Government before a decision is made.

Mrs. Jacqui Lait (Beckenham)

May I begin by welcoming today's statement on Scotland Office staffing, even though it is a shame that it will be six weeks before we can ask questions about it? On the subject of the supreme court, the hon. Lady will be aware that a number of Scottish cases go to the House of Lords each year. Can she tell us what thought has been given to arrangements for the handover of those cases to the supreme court when it comes into being? For instance, will they continue to their end in the Lords, will they be taken over by the supreme court while they are still in process, or will applicants have to return to "go"?

Mrs. McGuire

First, I would have been delighted to take questions on the staffing of the Scotland Office if the hon. Lady had managed to find a creative way of linking them into her question. I would like to put it on the record that this is a rational approach to the way in which the Scotland Office is now working. As for the transfer of cases, that will be managed properly—there are very few cases currently being considered by the House of Lords. Those cases that have to be dealt with by the House of Lords will, I understand, be concluded there. However, there will be transitional arrangements, and if I need to give the hon. Lady clarification of the detail of that major radical and important constitutional change in our judiciary, I shall certainly do so in writing.

Mrs. Lait

I am grateful for that offer and for the hon. Lady's putting on record the plan for handling the issue. On another angle of this matter, as the proposed creation of the supreme court shows that the devolution settlement is not settled, which parts of the House of Lords Committee, chaired by Lord Norton, is she considering for implementation?

Mrs. McGuire

The hon. Lady's question is so obtuse that even I do not understand it in this very robust debate. When we had an opportunity to discuss issues relating to the new Department for Constitutional Affairs and the Scotland Office, she did not raise the matter, but perhaps I could meet her after Scottish questions and we could discuss it in detail. Finally, we are dealing with a transitional arrangement for a radical approach to our judiciary in the United Kingdom. I should have thought that the hon. Lady would have welcomed that.