Parliamentary Counsel Office: Staffing (Hansard, 16 July 1987)

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Belstead)
My Lords, there are at present 24 legislative draftsmen on the office's strength, and additionally four on loan to the Law Commission. By the end of September, as a result of a recent recruitment exercise, the total number will have increased to 30.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that comparatively reassuring reply. Does he recall, as I am sure he does vividly, the fact that during the previous Session literally hundreds of drafting amendments had to be introduced into legislation, often at a very late stage? Can he give an assurance that the further steps which he has now announced will prevent that process being repeated when the long legislative programme in the Queen's Speech ends up in this House?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I understand my noble friend's concern. The kind of amendments to which my noble friend is referring are the responsibility of the sponsoring government departments. That therefore means the Ministers, which means those who sit on the Front Benches in both Houses of Parliament. I am confident that the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel will, as it has always done in the past, cope with the demands placed upon it.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, we warmly welcome the news that the number of counsel is to be 1154 increased to 30, and feel quite sure that this will improve the performance in the terms to which the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, referred. Will the noble Lord say further whether the post of Second Parliamentary Counsel is still vacant or whether it has been filled?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I am afraid that I am not briefed on that particular point. I shall have to write to the noble Lord.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord. I feel sure he will appreciate that this is an important supervisory post which will assist to improve the department's performance.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the work of parliamentary counsel, the legislators and indeed the users of statutes is greatly increased by Ministers and their departments requiring too much detail to be written into statutes, much of which is purely administrative and some of which is unenforceable? Will he therefore also bear in mind that we have fewer parliamentary counsel now than we had 15 years ago when the problem was not quite so acute? Is he able to assure us that the increase in the number of parliamentary counsel will not lead to a further increase in the contents of each statute?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I do not know that I can give my noble friend the undertaking that he seeks. However I say to my noble friend that I think that both members of the Government and also parliamentary counsel have heard clearly what has been said in your Lordships' House about the need for as much simplicity as possible. I should add that I should not always ascribe the complexity of what we study in Bills to the language of the draftsmen but rather to the complexity of the subjects with which the Acts deal.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, do we really require extra parliamentary counsel when it seems that their main work will be involved in privatising British national assets?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, they are very important subjects, and they all need legislative drafting.

The Earl of Selkirk
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether any consideration has been given to placing the parliamentary counsel under the Lord Chancellor rather than the Prime Minister, who at least theoretically ought to have more time to attend to their problems?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, the Parliamentary Counsel's offices consolidation branch was of course transferred in 1965 on loan to the Law Commission. Under arrangements which have become firmly established the office now provides the commission with draftsmen normally on two years secondment for the drafting of law reform Bills and consolidation Bills, and responsibility for the commission rests with my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor. I think that for the moment those seem to us to be the right arrangements.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, in the light of the Minister's answer to the noble Lord, Lord Renton, would he care to comment on the reports that the Secretary of State for Education and Science has requested no fewer than 200 extra civil servants to assist in the preparation and drafting of the forthcoming Education Bill?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I am relieved to say that I think that is rather another Question.

§ Lord Grimond
My Lords, is the Minister able to give us a slightly more definite answer to the noble question put by the noble Lord, Lord Renton, about the application of Parkinson's Law? Can we be assured that the appointment of more parliamentary counsel will not simply lead to more legislation? The basic trouble is not merely the parliamentary counsel but the endless spate of ill-thought out legislation with which this and the other place are inundated.

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, missed the point made by my noble friend Lord Renton at the beginning of his supplementary question that, as my noble friend said, there are fewer parliamentary counsel today than there were when my noble friend produced his distinguished report in 1975. In fact I am not certain whether that is the case but I take it, as I always do from my noble friend Lord Renton, as being true.
I point out to the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, that the difficulty of this situation—and it is a serious one—is that the wastage rate in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel is high. I should not wish the House to think that my noble friend Lord Renton's recommendation was in some way disregarded. Since the Renton Report of 1975 no fewer than 21 parliamentary counsel have been recruited, but the trouble has been that there has been a wastage of 18. To come back to the beginning again, if it is the case that, despite these efforts, we have rather fewer parliamentary counsel than we had some years ago I do not think the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, need worry about the volume of legislation.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, will my noble friend the Minister agree, in view of the projected legislation, that even with 30 counsel there is scant hope of improvement in the quality of Bills when introduced; there is scant hope of avoiding that series of government amendments which have bedevilled so many of the Bills; and there is scant hope of easing the burdens of your Lordships' revisory role?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I would agree with my noble friend's concluding remark that the revising role of your Lordships' House will continue to have a heavy burden placed upon it, but I think we can take comfort from the fact that that means that your Lordships' House is absolutely necessary.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that if one has that kind of wastage rate—18 to 25—there must be something seriously wrong with the way in which one treats them?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I think that parliamentary counsel are treated certainly by junior 1156 members of the Government with considerable respect. The problem is that it is an onerous job.

§ Viscount Hanworth
My Lords, does the noble Lord recall that last year, after the Recess, there was a Bill dealt with in the spill-over Session—I cannot remember what it was—and the majority of amendments came from the Government? Does this not show quite clearly that they had not had time to consider that Bill properly? The same applies to most Bills going through our Chamber today.

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, I take what the noble Viscount, Lord Hanworth, has said seriously, but this of course is a dereliction of duty so far as the Government are concerned and not neglect so far as parliamentary counsel are concerned.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, is my noble friend able to say whether the Government have investigated the reason for the disturbingly high rate of wastage about which he informed your Lordships a moment ago? If they have been into the question, what is the reason?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, the reasons are different. There are six different reasons that have been ascribed to me ranging from retirement to some not being up to the required standard.

§ Lord Broxbourne
My Lords, would not another reason be that these very ingenious gentlemen can attract greater rewards in the private sector by pursuing professional practice?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, it is perfectly true, as my noble friend Lord Broxbourne says, that the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel is operating in a competitive field. Obviously there is a certain amount of wastage from that point of view.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, will the noble Lord reassure us that there is no intention of privatising the legislation in this case?

§ Lord Belstead
My Lords, if I may say so, I think that that falls a little wide of the original Question.