Clause 27 - Justices' clerks and assistant clerks
Courts Bill [Lords]
2:30 pm
Mr Christopher Leslie (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs; Shipley, Labour)
Before the break, I think that I had dealt with amendments Nos. 34, 37 and 38, which were largely about the process of appointment of justices' clerks and their assistants. My concern was that the amendments would be undesirable in terms of normal civil service employment practices.
I now want to consider amendments Nos. 35 and 36, tabled by the official Opposition. Amendment No. 35 is largely a paving amendment for amendment No. 36, which would result in the Bill stating:
''A person may be designated as a justices' clerk''
if he or she is appointed
''with the agreement of the chairman and deputy chairman of the local justice area.''
I have a number of concerns about that proposal. The amendment would require the Lord Chancellor to hold such consultations before making the appointment, and that would be impractical, as it would require him to decide on the area to which he would assign the clerk before the appointment, and then to consult the local bench on the appointment. That would severely restrict the flexibility that a new courts agency would achieve, and the new business processes that we want put in place.
It would also be undesirable for the chairman and deputy chairman of an area to be able to veto staff appointments made by the Lord Chancellor; there will be ample opportunities for normal consultation, as we said earlier in our proceedings. Clause 21 gives the Lord Chancellor the duty to take reasonable and practical steps to consult lay justices on matters affecting the performance of their duties and to ascertain their views on such matters. I assure the Committee that magistrates will be consulted on such relevant matters—for example, before a change in the assignment of a justices' clerk to an area. Clause 27(4) gives the Lord Chancellor the duty to consult the chairman or his or her deputy on the lay justices assigned to the area.
I hope that in the light of my comments, and those that I made before we adjourned this morning, the amendment will be withdrawn.