---

'PROTOCOL No. 6 Article 1 The death penalty shall be abolished Article 2
A State may make provision in its law for the death penalty in respect of acts committed in time of war or of imminent threat of war; such penalty shall be applied only in the instances laid down in the law and in accordance with its provisions. The State shall communicate to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe the relevant provisions of that law.'.--[Mr. McFall.] Schedule 1, as amended, agreed to. Schedule 2 agreed to.

Schedule 3

Judicial Pensions

Question proposed, That this schedule be the Third schedule to the Bill.

Mr. Mike O'Brien: Schedule 3 makes the provision specified in clause 18(6) about judicial pensions in relation to the holder of judicial office in the UK who serves as a judge of the European Court of Human Rights. It places a duty on the relevant Minister--the Lord Chancellor for a judge serving in England and Wales or Northern Ireland and the Secretary of State for a Scottish judge--to make an order ensuring that a UK serving judge's pension position will not be prejudiced as a result of his or her appointment to the court.

Sir Norman Fowler: We may need a slightly longer exposition of the schedule than the one just given by the Minister. I am suspicious about the fact that the last schedule to a Bill on human rights deals with judicial pensions. I suppose that we are dealing with the human rights of judges, as opposed to those of everybody else. I should like to know a little more about the position on judicial pensions. What are the Government trying to do in the schedule? What is the demand for the measure? Will the Minister say a few words about the cost that is involved? I should like to ask four straightforward and specific questions. I know that there is not much time left, but I am sure that there is enough time for the Minister to reply to my questions and I am equally sure that he knows the answers. First, will he tell us a little about the schemes? Are they properly funded by employer's and/or employees' contributions, or are they pay-as-you-go? How much is the cost to the taxpayer of the employer's contributions?

2 Jul 1998 : Column 573

Secondly, how long does the scheme take to mature? The standard final-salary pension scheme is one that matures after 40 years of work, but we assume that not many judges qualify under that criterion. Will the Minister tell us what the qualification is and how many years to maturity a full pension requires? In the schedule, we are protecting the rights under the scheme of a judge who transfers from one place to another, but how long does a judge have to serve to obtain the full pension? Thirdly, what contributions do the judges have to make and what contributions does the taxpayer have to make? Fourthly, is the scheme permissive? In other words, is it permissive in the sense of allowing a judge to transfer to a personal pension if that is his wish; or is he tied in to the final-salary scheme as set out at the end of the schedule? If he is able to transfer to a personal pension, will the Government as the employer make the same contribution as would be made to the final-salary scheme? Those are straightforward, simple questions, to which I am sure that the Minister knows the answers. I should be grateful for any answers, because public money is involved and the taxpayer is involved through employer contributions. The Committee will want to hear a little more explanation than the 30 seconds-worth that the Minister gave at the beginning, given the importance of the matter, not only to judges but to taxpayers generally.

Mr. O'Brien: I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising his questions. Given the enthusiasm with which he put them, I thought that he was concerned that we might have a judicial pensions mis-selling scandal on our hands, but I can assure him that we have nothing like that. The schedule makes statutory provision so that if a judge from the UK courts goes to Strasbourg, his or her pension will be protected. That is all we are doing.

The right hon. Gentleman asked a series of detailed questions about how the judges' pension scheme operates. I shall have a word with my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, and give him all the details. However, we are talking about a relatively small sum of money, used to fund over the next 20 or 30 years the pensions of a couple of judges--unless the right hon. Gentleman expects us to appoint many judges to the Strasbourg court. In the explanatory and financial memorandum to the Bill, under the heading "Financial effects of the Bill", he will see set out clearly:

"The cost will depend on both the number of years served at the Court and the salary of the relevant UK judicial office at the point of retirement."

All that we are doing is ensuring the same sort of pension provision that a judge would get if he served in the UK.

It being three hours after the commencement of proceedings in Committee, The Chairman, pursuant to the Orders [1 June and 17 June], put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.

Question put and agreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

The Chairman then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at that hour.

2 Jul 1998 : Column 574

New schedule 3

Remedial Orders

Orders
1.--(1) A remedial order may--

(a) contain such incidental, supplemental, consequential or transitional provision as the person making it considers appropriate;
(b) be made so as to have effect from a date earlier than that on which it is made;
(c) make provision for the delegation of specific functions;
(d) make different provision for different cases.
(2) The power conferred by sub-paragraph (1)(a) includes--
(a) power to amend or repeal primary legislation (including primary legislation other than that which contains the incompatible provision); and
(b) power to amend or revoke subordinate legislation (including subordinate legislation other than that which contains the incompatible provision).
(3) No person is to be guilty of an offence solely as a result of the retrospective effect of a remedial order.

Procedure
2. No remedial order may be made unless--
(a) a draft of the order has been approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament made after the end of the period of 60 days beginning with the day on which the draft was laid; or
(b) it is declared in the order that it appears to the person making it that, because of the urgency of the matter, it is necessary to make the order without a draft being so approved. Orders laid in draft
3.--(1) No draft may be laid under paragraph 2(a) unless--
(a) the person proposing to make the order has laid before Parliament a document which contains a draft of the proposed order and the required information; and
(b) the period of 60 days, beginning with the day on which the document required by this subsection was laid, has ended.
(2) If representations have been made during that period, the draft laid under paragraph 2(a) must be accompanied by a statement containing--
(a) a summary of the representations; and
(b) if, as a result of the representations, the proposed order has been changed, details of the changes. Urgent cases
4.--(1) If a remedial order ("the original order") is made without being approved in draft, the person making it must lay it before Parliament, accompanied by the required information, after it is made.
(2) If representations have been made during the period of 60 days beginning with the day on which the original order was made, the person making it must (after the end of that period) lay before Parliament a statement containing--
(a) a summary of the representations; and
(b) if, as a result of the representations, he considers it appropriate to make changes to the original order, details of the changes.
(3) If sub-paragraph (2)(b) applies, the person making the statement must--
(a) make a further remedial order replacing the original order; and
(b) lay the replacement order before Parliament.

2 Jul 1998 : Column 575

(4) If, at the end of the period of 120 days beginning with the day on which the original order was made, a resolution has not been passed by each House approving the original or replacement order, the order ceases to have effect (but without that affecting anything previously done under either order or the power to make a fresh remedial order). Definitions
5. In this Schedule--
"representations" means representations about a remedial order (or a proposed remedial order) made to the person making (or proposing to make) it and includes any relevant Parliamentary report or resolution; and
"required information" means--
(a) an explanation of the incompatibility which the order (or proposed order) seeks to remove, including particulars of the relevant declaration, finding or order; and
(b) a statement of the reasons for proceeding under section 10 and for making an order in those terms. Calculating periods
6. In calculating any period for the purposes of this section, no account is to be taken of any time during which--
(a) Parliament is dissolved or prorogued; or
(b) both Houses are adjourned for more than four days.'.--[Mr. McFall.] Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. Bill reported, with amendments. Bill, as amended, to be considered tomorrow.

---