Mr Laurence Robertson (Shadow Minister, Economic Affairs; Tewkesbury, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 48, in schedule 1, page 55, line 24, at end insert

'or for any other reasonable reason, providing that reason is stated.'.

Welcome back to the Chair, Mr. Benton. The amendment relates to paragraph 4 of schedule 1, which deals with the terms of office of the members of the consumer credit appeals tribunal panel. Sub-paragraph 2 states:

''The Lord Chancellor may remove a member of either panel from office on the ground of incapacity or misbehaviour.''

The meaning of ''misbehaviour'' is perhaps obvious. The meaning of ''incapacity'' might be open to some debate. Would it be helpful to the Lord Chancellor to have a slightly extended remit and to allow him to remove a member of the panel for

''any other reasonable reason, provided that reason is stated.''? 

That might enable the Lord Chancellor to ensure that the panel is flexible and able to understand all the issues likely to come before it.

Mr Gerry Sutcliffe (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Employment Relations, Competition and Consumers), Department of Trade and Industry; Bradford South, Labour)

I, too, welcome you to the Chair, Mr. Benton. I have not been out to lunch today so my memory will not be impaired. I fully remember the issues that we discussed this morning.

I would like to go through my case with regard to amendment No. 48, and then perhaps we can explore it further. The only grounds on which the Lord Chancellor may remove a member of the appeals tribunal from office are incapacity or misbehaviour. The schedule does not change the current position of members of the existing panels. There are strict requirements for the qualifications of panel members, which are set out in paragraph 3 of schedule 1.

Once the Lord Chancellor has appointed the members, they are entitled to a full term of office unless they are incapacitated or misbehave. It is imperative that members of the tribunal are certain of their security of office. The schedule makes the reasons for removal very clear. It also makes it clear that tribunal members should hold and vacate office in accordance with the terms of their appointment, which will be determined by the Lord Chancellor.

Further to that, the selection of particular members of the tribunal to hear each appeal shall be carried out in accordance with arrangements made by the tribunal president. That enables the president to take into account members' availability and particular areas of expertise. Of course, the Lord Chancellor does not have to reappoint any member once their term of office comes to an end. That is the case that we wish to pursue with regard to this amendment. However, I am interested to hear whether the hon. Gentleman wishes to discuss it further.

Mr Laurence Robertson (Shadow Minister, Economic Affairs; Tewkesbury, Conservative)

The Minister has given a sympathetic response, but he appears to be fishing for more information from me. I do not think that I can explore the matter any further.

Mr Gerry Sutcliffe (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Employment Relations, Competition and Consumers), Department of Trade and Industry; Bradford South, Labour)

I am not wildly opposed to what the hon. Gentleman says. There are established criteria, but I will give a commitment to consider the issue of reasonable grounds. If we are able to amend those we will, and if we are unable to, I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman gets the reasons for that.

Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger (Bridgwater, Conservative)

Perhaps I can help the Minister a bit. The Committee on Standards in Public Life has a code of practice. Would the Minister consider incorporating part of that? It is not applicable to most of this, but there is a serious set of guidelines that could be used. Perhaps the Minister will consider that; it may be helpful.

Mr Gerry Sutcliffe (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Employment Relations, Competition and Consumers), Department of Trade and Industry; Bradford South, Labour)

I am happy to do that. I must be careful not to start off the afternoon by—[Interruption.] Does my hon. Friend wish me to give way?

Mr Chris Bryant (Rhondda, Labour)

No.  

Mr Gerry Sutcliffe (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Employment Relations, Competition and Consumers), Department of Trade and Industry; Bradford South, Labour)

I thought that my hon. Friend was trying to be helpful again.

In the spirit of the amendment, we will examine that matter—I wish to reassure the Committee on that. However, if, in the spirit that I am trying to engender, I somehow drop myself in it, I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will accept it if we are unable to do as he wishes. We will consider the idea of ''any other reasonable reason'' as an additional test.

Mr Laurence Robertson (Shadow Minister, Economic Affairs; Tewkesbury, Conservative)

I am happy to accept that. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.