Oral Answers to Questions — Advocate-General – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 8 May 2001.
Anne McIntosh
Conservative, Vale of York
12:00,
8 May 2001
On how many occasions she has been requested to give advice on the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998 in Scotland; and if she will make a statement. [159313]
Dr Lynda Clark
Advocate General for Scotland, Department for Constitutional Affairs, Advocate General for Scotland
When requested, I give advice, as a United Kingdom Law Officer, on a variety of matters including questions concerning the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Anne McIntosh
Conservative, Vale of York
I am most grateful to the Advocate-General for repeating her answer to my question of one month ago. Will she now tell me how many times she has been requested to give legal advice, what the cost of such advice has been on such occasions and what the total cost of implementing the Human Rights Act in Scotland has been?
The Advocate-General:
Duplication—we call it corroboration in Scotland—is a doctrine with which the hon. Lady may be familiar. It is a long-standing tradition that Law Officers do not advise about the questions that they have been asked—one which Law Officers on both sides of the House recognise.
I am not going to answer the hon. Lady's question because of that general convention, Which Administrations of all complexions have followed for many years, and from which I see no reason to depart on this occasion. So far as the cost is concerned, my salary is a matter of public record; hon. Members can look it up.
Tom Clarke
Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston
Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that, in terms of human rights in Scotland, the Disability Rights Commission will always have an important part to play? It is one of the finest achievements of the Government. Will she remember that hundreds of thousands of people in Scotland are delighted that this United Kingdom Parliament delivered that measure?
The Advocate-General:
With Some assistance from my right hon. Friend, the convention on human rights has been delivered in Scotland. It is an important step that individual citizens can now exercise their rights and have their rights guaranteed by the domestic courts of this country, which is a much cheaper and quicker alternative than going to Strasbourg.
Crispin Blunt
Conservative, Reigate
Having just treated the House to that extraordinary mixture of incompetence and contempt, will the Advocate-General tell us what she is for?
The Advocate-General:
Certainly. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to listen, I will tell him—at length, if Mr. Speaker permits. Under the Scotland Act 1998, I have a number of functions. I inherited the advisory functions of the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor-General. I advise the United Kingdom Government about a range of matters on not only Scots law but European law, including the European convention on human rights. I also sit on a number of Cabinet Committees. I have a statutory role under section 33 of the 1998 Act of considering Scottish Parliament legislation, and—
Michael Martin
Speaker of the House of Commons
Order. The question is about human rights, not about the Advocate-General's role.
Mr David Stewart
Labour, Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber
If she will make a statement on her role in monitoring the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998. [159314]
Dr Lynda Clark
Advocate General for Scotland, Department for Constitutional Affairs, Advocate General for Scotland
If the human rights point raises a devolution issue, it must be intimated to me and I have powers to intervene. I am also kept informed about the general impact of the Human Rights Act, including important court cases. With reference to the question from the hon. Member for Reigate (Mr. Blunt), it is because of the devolution aspects that I have a role in relation to human rights.
Mr David Stewart
Labour, Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber
Does my hon. and learned Friend agree that the advantage of the Human Rights Act is that it makes justice more accessible for ordinary people by fast-tracking access to the United Kingdom courts. avoiding the cost and the delays involved in going to Strasbourg? How long does it take to raise a case now?
The Advocate-General:
A human rights case can be raised with great speed in the domestic courts in Scotland. Depending on the situation, it could be raised and dealt with by the court within a few days. The appeal process has shown that human rights issues can be taken through the entire process, all the way to the Privy Council, within months, which is a vast improvement on the previous situation, whereby individual citizens sometimes had to wait years before a court considered their claim.
The cabinet is the group of twenty or so (and no more than 22) senior government ministers who are responsible for running the departments of state and deciding government policy.
It is chaired by the prime minister.
The cabinet is bound by collective responsibility, which means that all its members must abide by and defend the decisions it takes, despite any private doubts that they might have.
Cabinet ministers are appointed by the prime minister and chosen from MPs or peers of the governing party.
However, during periods of national emergency, or when no single party gains a large enough majority to govern alone, coalition governments have been formed with cabinets containing members from more than one political party.
War cabinets have sometimes been formed with a much smaller membership than the full cabinet.
From time to time the prime minister will reorganise the cabinet in order to bring in new members, or to move existing members around. This reorganisation is known as a cabinet re-shuffle.
The cabinet normally meets once a week in the cabinet room at Downing Street.
The Speaker is an MP who has been elected to act as Chairman during debates in the House of Commons. He or she is responsible for ensuring that the rules laid down by the House for the carrying out of its business are observed. It is the Speaker who calls MPs to speak, and maintains order in the House. He or she acts as the House's representative in its relations with outside bodies and the other elements of Parliament such as the Lords and the Monarch. The Speaker is also responsible for protecting the interests of minorities in the House. He or she must ensure that the holders of an opinion, however unpopular, are allowed to put across their view without undue obstruction. It is also the Speaker who reprimands, on behalf of the House, an MP brought to the Bar of the House. In the case of disobedience the Speaker can 'name' an MP which results in their suspension from the House for a period. The Speaker must be impartial in all matters. He or she is elected by MPs in the House of Commons but then ceases to be involved in party politics. All sides in the House rely on the Speaker's disinterest. Even after retirement a former Speaker will not take part in political issues. Taking on the office means losing close contact with old colleagues and keeping apart from all groups and interests, even avoiding using the House of Commons dining rooms or bars. The Speaker continues as a Member of Parliament dealing with constituent's letters and problems. By tradition other candidates from the major parties do not contest the Speaker's seat at a General Election. The Speakership dates back to 1377 when Sir Thomas Hungerford was appointed to the role. The title Speaker comes from the fact that the Speaker was the official spokesman of the House of Commons to the Monarch. In the early years of the office, several Speakers suffered violent deaths when they presented unwelcome news to the King. Further information can be obtained from factsheet M2 on the UK Parliament website.
The Privy Council goes back to the earliest days of the Monarchy, when it comprised those appointed by the King or Queen to advise on matters of state.
As the constitution developed into today's constitutional monarchy, under which The Sovereign acts on the advice of Ministers, so the Privy Council adapted. Its day to day business is transacted by those of Her Majesty's Ministers who are Privy Counsellors, that is all Cabinet Ministers and a number of junior Ministers. Membership of the Privy Council brings with it the right to be called "Right Honourable".
The Privy Council still meets regularly, on average once a month, but, as with the Cabinet, most of its business is transacted in discussion and correspondence between its Ministerial members and the Government Departments that advise them. The Privy Council Office (which is itself a Government Department) provides a secretariat for these discussions, as the Cabinet Office does in relation to the business of Cabinet and Cabinet Committees. Councils are held by The Queen and are attended by Ministers and the Clerk of the Council. At each meeting the Council will obtain Her Majesty's formal approval to a number of Orders which have already been discussed and approved by Ministers, much as Acts of Parliament become law through the giving of the Royal Assent after having been debated in Parliament.
Meetings are reported in the Court Circular, along with the names of Ministers attending (usually four in number). The Orders made at each Council are in the public domain, and each bears the date and place of the Council at which it was made. There is therefore nothing at all "secret" about Privy Council meetings. The myth that the Privy Council is a secretive body springs from the wording of the Privy Counsellor's Oath , which, in its current form, dates back to Tudor times. It requires those taking it to "keep secret all matters...treated of in Council". The Oath (or solemn affirmation for those who cannot take an Oath) is still administered, and is still binding; but it is only in very special circumstances nowadays that matters will come to a Privy Counsellor on "Privy Council terms". These will mostly concern matters of the national interest where it is important for senior members of Opposition parties to have access to Government information.
