We are talking about pillars of the constitution. Let us think about the judicial pillar—our courts. Right at the top, we have the Lord Chief Justice. Under the former arrangements, the Lord Chancellor used to span both pillars: he was part of the Executive and the most senior judge. However, it seems appropriate that under the new arrangements there should be appointments by the Executive, but with the concurrence of, after consultation with, this very important figure in the other pillar. Let us not forget that the legal profession gives us our judges, so if it was not truly independent, that would have very worrying implications for our constitution. By having the most senior judge involved in the process, the constitutional position would be subject to a proper check. That is my view, although I am willing to accept that there may be other ways in which to achieve the objective and that we can discuss the matter further in Committee. However, doing nothing is not acceptable and simply reversing the amendment would be intolerable.
Legal Services Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Oliver Heald
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 4 June 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
461 c43-4 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:24:05 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400161
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400161
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_400161