I welcome the last part of what the Minister said, but, with respect, I fail to understand the argument that because the Lord Chancellor—who is accountable to Parliament—must obtain someone else's agreement to an appointment that he himself ultimately makes anyway, that somehow undermines his accountability. That does not strike me as logical. If consultation takes place, ultimately it is the Lord Chancellor's decision; it is just that he has to get someone else to agree with it.
I am glad the Minister has said that if the Lord Chief Justice really thought there was to be an inappropriate appointment, he would have the right to go public. Will she consider entrenching the process by at some point giving the Lord Chief Justice the same right to make a statement to Parliament as he has in relation to other matters under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005?
Legal Services Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Neill
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 15 October 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
464 c588-9 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:38:14 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417178
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417178
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_417178