§ Lord Beaumont of Whitleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Answer by the Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 6 May (HL Deb, cols. 609–11), why the Law Commission considers "some" of the contents of the statutes "as unsuitable for the Commission to look at", and what alternative methods there are for removing these obsolete laws from the statute book. [HL1862]
56WA
§ The Lord Chancellor (Lord Irvine of Lairg)The Acts to which the noble Lord refers are (a) the Treason Act (Northern Ireland) 1537, (b) the Crown of Ireland Act 1542 and (c) the Act of Supremacy (Ireland) 1560. I understand that the Law Commission has not examined what remains in force of these Acts with a view to their being included, in their entirety, as candidates in a future statute law repeal measure.
By agreement with the authorities of both Houses, statute law repeal Bills, as opposed to more general law reform measures, must neither be controversial nor raise issues which might reasonably require debate. The three Acts in question deal with matters, for example acts of treason, which would be likely to provoke debate. Therefore they would not be suitable for the statute law repeal process.
Apart from that process, these Acts could be repealed by a Bill introduced by a Member of either House.
The noble Lord will be aware that Clause 33 of the Crime and Disorder Bill, under consideration in another place, replaces the death penalty in these and other Acts with life imprisonment. The Government have no other plans to repeal or further amend the remaining sections of these Acts.