HL Deb 07 January 2003 vol 642 c167WA
Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government

Further to the answer by the Lord Chancellor on 12 December (HL Deb, cols 377–78), why the power to recommend to the Sovereign who should be appointed Queen's Counsel should be retained by the Lord Chancellor and not delegated instead to the Lord Chief Justice, who is independent of the Executive. [HL724]

The Lord Chancellor (Lord Irvine of Lairg)

As I explained in my answer to the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, on 12 December, the Lord Chancellor is at the end of a line of processes that includes impartial civil servants, the judiciary, the legal profession and now lay assessors. Every stage is open to the closest scrutiny by the Judicial Appointments Commissioner. The Lord Chancellor is also directly and personally answerable to Parliament for the system and policies relating to the award of Queen's Counsel. That kind of accountability could not be appropriate for the Lord Chief Justice. Nor would it be appropriate for the Lord Chief Justice to be responsible for a system which exists to confer benefits on consumers in relation to the provision of services by the legal profession.