PROVISIONS AS TO APPEALS AGAINST ORDERS SPECIFYING PRICES. (Hansard, 7 November 1939)

LORD STRABOLGI

I did not want to refer to this matter on the Second Reading, but perhaps I may be allowed to do so here. I am glad that the Lord Chancellor is present. "A person" has to be a member of the legal profession. Excuse my ignorance: does that mean a solicitor or only a barrister at law? The other observation I wish to make applies, whatever the answer is. Under the rule of the predecessor of the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor, I had occasion to protest in your Lordships' House on more than one occasion against the apparent monopoly of appointments by members of the legal profession. I was hoping for a change under the régime of the present Lord Chancellor. I am really beginning to wonder where all the lawyers are coming from for these jobs. Every time a Bill is brought in by the present Government and anyone is appointed to administer that Bill, in practically every case he has to be a member of the legal profession. I have known some very wise members of the legal profession and I have known some extremely foolish ones. The fact that a man has read for the Bar or has practised for a short time as a solicitor—and some solicitors are convicted every year for roguery, as the Lord Chancellor knows perfectly well—I submit does not alone always qualify him for the requirements of a referee to administer this complicated and, as I think, largely illusory measure.

What I humbly suggest is that you need somebody with business experience, knowledge of affairs, knowledge of the world and knowledge of mankind. And those people do not always happen to 1716 have had legal training or to have done legal work. I do not know if any other noble Lords have noticed this growing tendency in the last twenty years, since I have been in active politics, more and more to confine appointments to members of the legal profession. I think it is a bad development. It is bad for the legal profession; it takes the members of that profession from their proper work; and I think myself it is bad for the general body. I say that, of course, without any sort of reflection on the legal profession in its proper sphere and carrying out its professional functions. But that these posts must always be filled by lawyers is, I suggest, dangerous, for most lawyers are members of the Party represented by the majority of noble Lords in this House—I am talking of course of peace-time—which means in practice that only high Tories are appointed to these situations; and they often forget their legal function and allow their judgments to be warped by political bias.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR

In answer to the noble Lord, a member of the legal profession may be either a barrister or a solicitor. With reference to what the noble Lord has said as to there being wise members and foolish members of the legal profession, that difficulty has been got over by saying that the Lord Chancellor shall appoint the members of the legal profession and he is not likely to choose one of the foolish members. Perhaps I may call the noble Lord's attention also to a fact that he may have overlooked—namely, that by paragraph 3 of the Second Schedule the referee will have the assistance of assessors who will be just such persons as the noble Lord thinks ought to be put on the tribunal. The fact that this practice of which the noble Lord complains has gone on for the last twenty years and has not yet provoked a revolution obviously shows it has satisfied the public.