House of Commons Hansard Debates for 23 Nov 1999 (pt 36)

Mr. Dismore: My understanding of Sir Leonard Peach's terms of reference is that he is to consider judicial

23 Nov 1999 : Column 588

appointments across the board, including those to the High Court. As for secret soundings, they are called that because the person who is affected--the applicant--has no knowledge, except in the most general terms, of what comments have been made about him or her before or after a refusal. That is why they are roundly condemned by many in the profession.

Jane Kennedy: My hon. Friend returns to the point with his usual diligence. All I can say is that we shall await the publication of the Peach report and consider the recommendations carefully. I cannot ask the House to accept the imposition of delay on the implementation of the order by having to wait for the findings of that inquiry.

My hon. Friend mentioned the imbalance in the proportion of women and members of ethnic minorities who are represented in the judiciary. The Lord Chancellor takes no satisfaction in that imbalance and has taken several steps to redress it. We believe that, as more women and members of ethnic minorities enter the legal profession, their numbers in the judiciary will continue to show a steady increase. However, there is no room for complacency. The Lord Chancellor will continue to encourage applications from all eligible candidates, especially from those who are currently under-represented on the Bench.

Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye): My hon. Friend said that the reason for non-advertisement was that the positions were infrequently available. Given that, on this occasion, there is a job lot, is this not an opportunity for her to suggest to the Lord Chancellor that, on this occasion, the positions may be advertised?

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. Before the Minister responds to that intervention, perhaps I can help her. We are not discussing how judges are selected. We are talking precisely about why we need more judges in England and Wales.

Jane Kennedy: I am grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for that pointer.

If the increase in the number of High Court judges is inadequate, as suggested by the right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg), there can be further increases. As there is no power to reduce the number, the Lord Chancellor must err on the side of caution.

Mr. Hogg: I hope that, before the Minister resumes her seat, she will address the question raised by the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Burnett) on the impact on the Court of Appeal of the European convention and the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. By what number does she anticipate that the Court of Appeal will have to be increased? She will bear in mind that Court of Appeal judges are drawn from the puisne Bench. That being so, more judges in the Court of Appeal will mean more judges to the puisne Bench, and we need to know how many.

Jane Kennedy: The Access to Justice Act 1999 allows us to divert from the Court of Appeal those cases that,

23 Nov 1999 : Column 589

by their nature, do not require the attention of the most senior judges. I cannot give a figure to the House today but I shall seek--[Interruption.]

Mr. Hogg: The Minister may have one now.

Jane Kennedy: I do not have a figure for the number of judges, but the impact that the Human Rights Act 1998 will have on the work load of the court service has been estimated by drawing on the experience of other countries that have implemented similar human rights legislation. We expect the impact to be felt in a series of ways. Committals for trials are expected to increase by 2,575 cases a year. I could give more figures if the House wanted them. Appeals are predicted to rise by 25 per cent. in each of the first two years and by 10 per cent. per annum thereafter. However, none of those figures relate to the effect that there will be on the number of judges in the higher courts. I am not able to give the right hon. and learned Gentleman that figure.

I can tell the House that the average hearing time for a trial is predicted to increase by 12 per cent. per annum for the first two years and 10 per cent. thereafter. I have already given the right hon. and learned Gentleman those figures. The average hearing time for an appeal is predicted to increase by half an hour for the first two years and by 15 minutes thereafter.

I am grateful for the direction and assistance that you have given me, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am grateful for the support of some hon. Members, although I have obviously not been able to please most of those Members who have contributed to the debate. Approval of the instrument will enable the High Court to meet the challenges arising on implementation of the Human Rights Act and the Immigration and Asylum Act and to ensure the efficient and timely disposal of court business, and I hope that the House will approve it.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That the draft Maximum Number of Judges Order 1999, which was laid before this House on 1st November, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.

10.59 pm

Ms Sandra Osborne (Ayr): I am grateful for the opportunity to raise a matter of great concern in my constituency--the future of HMS Gannet, which is based beside the small village of Monkton, near Prestwick.

I preface my remarks by stating that I support the strategic defence review and acknowledge that changes at HMS Gannet can be anticipated as a result of that important document. I recognise that, as do all those who currently work at HMS Gannet. The reason why I stand here tonight is that I strongly suspect why decisions are being made, behind closed doors and without ministerial authority, that have less to do with the strategic defence review than with the Royal Navy's overall budget position.

I believe that options are being considered that are different from the previously published intentions, which are public knowledge. They will be based not on what has been announced as part of the SDR, but purely on saving money. In the event of any doubt, I wish to make it clear that HMS Gannet is not expendable as an in-year savings measure, and I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister agrees. If I have anything to do with it, HMS Gannet will not go quietly or unnoticed.

My hon. Friend will be aware that the base at HMS Gannet is well established and fulfils two main functions, the first of which is the defence of the Clyde. The base is there to defend Trident with eight aircraft that assistwith anti-submarine warfare operations. Secondly, HMS Gannet fulfils a search and rescue function by utilising two Sea King helicopters. The service is highly prized in Scotland and has saved many lives.

The search and rescue facility covers an area from Fort William down the middle of the country, including the Lake district, and extends as far down as the Isle of Man. It may also go 200 miles west out to sea, and further if refuelling is possible.

The three nearest alternative search and rescue stations are Stornoway, which is contracted to the Coastguard, RAF Lossiemouth in Morayshire and RAF Boulmer, north of Newcastle. This year, HMS Gannet has already carried out 230 search and rescue jobs, which is more than last year's total of 222.

Medical evacuation duties can involve picking up medical emergencies from fishing boats and transporting them to hospital, and airlifting medical teams to the islands and transporting casualties back to hospitals on the mainland. The public in Scotland are familiar with the search and rescue team's duty of transporting car crash victims and pregnant women to hospitals in emergencies. The support of mountain rescue teams is another vital role for HMS Gannet's search and rescue facility.

HMS Gannet personnel were the first to attend the tragic recent air crash at Glasgow airport, and were on hand quickly to assist RAF Boulmer at last week's Dunbar crash. In the role of military search and rescue, HMS Gannet provides 24-hour cover at 15 minutes' notice during the day and 45 minutes' notice at night, although in practice the response times are shorter. Air ambulances do not have a rescue capability and must land only on approved landing sites, unlike HMS Gannet.

23 Nov 1999 : Column 591

About 450 people work at HMS Gannet, of whom 305 are Royal Navy personnel made up of 45 officers and 260 other ranks. In addition, there are about 130 civilian personnel made up of civil servants, Ministry of Defence police and guards and locally employed contractors. HMS Gannet provides a parenting facility, not only for those who work there but for RAF staff who work at the air traffic control centre at Atlantic house, Prestwick. All those people live locally, send their children to local schools and contribute greatly to the Ayrshire economy.

If you are familiar with Ayrshire, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you will not be surprised to learn that 95 per cent. of Royal Navy personnel based at HMS Gannet volunteer to go there. It is an area with an extremely high quality of life, and there is a proud tradition among those from the Royal Navy who have served at Prestwick over the years, and many fond memories. It is regarded as a significant area for people who wish to be employed in the Fleet Air Arm base and it is the only one of its kind north of Somerset.

The site of HMS Gannet is leased from the adjacent Prestwick airport. Both are situated on the coast, with an outstanding view of the Isle of Arran. It has also provided welcome job opportunities for generations of local people, as well as contributing in many other positive ways to the local community.

For quite some time it was known that a review of the impact of the SDR on HMS Gannet was being carried out. In July 1998, I was informed that search and rescue would not be affected by any changes, and that the Sea King helicopters would be replaced by Merlin in 2002. I was also told that a detailed technical study was being carried out in relation to the anti-submarine helicopters which protect Faslane, including where they would be based. No decisions had been taken, and any changes would be several years further down the line and subject to ministerial approval. The options for best fulfilling the requirements endorsed by the SDR would be considered, and, although no decisions have been announced, one crucial factor was clear--the decision not to purchase any more Merlin helicopters was bound to affect HMS Gannet in some way.

The supporting essay of the SDR concerned with naval aviation in relation to helicopters states:

"The nature and scale of the submarine threat has changed since the end of the cold war with a corresponding change in the type of military response required. The Merlin helicopter remains a vital part of the Navy's future capability but we will be able to make a reduction in overall numbers compared to earlier plans. This means:

1 We will not procure further Merlin anti-submarine helicopters beyond the 44 already on order and

2 Some amendment to the previous Merlin deployment plan, for example, the Sea King MK 6 helicopters at RNAS Prestwick will not be replaced when they go out of service at a date yet to be decided."

I wonder whether Ministers were briefed that when, post-SDR, it was decided that a second batch of Merlin would not be bought, it would potentially lead to the closure of a base in Scotland and that there may no longer be a permanent presence to protect Trident on call at very short notice. I respectfully ask my hon. Friend to reconsider that.

23 Nov 1999 : Column 592

However, paragraph 68 of the SDR concerning the operating posture of Trident states:

"current threat levels do not require large numbers of conventional forces permanently allocated to the protection of the deterrent. We will, however, ensure that we can restore a higher state of alert should this become necessary at any time".

I have already stated that I support the SDR. It is very welcome that threat levels have diminished to such an extent, and, as my hon. Friend will agree, we all look forward to the day when nuclear disarmament becomes a reality and we no longer have Trident on the Clyde.

I certainly agree, therefore, to the concept of reduced protection. The question is to what extent it should be reduced. Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be unthinkable, even in the present conditions of reduced threat, for there to be no effective defence of the Clyde? Will he recognise the concern that that would cause to people in the west of Scotland and elsewhere, including those who are opposed to Trident being based at Faslane but who would certainly wish to be confident that it is being properly protected? We are all aware that Trident can be inviolate only if we can be sure of its abilityto go undetected. That requires the assistance of anti-submarine aircraft.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that, post-SDR, any decisions taken regarding the future of HMS Gannet will ensure that Trident can be deployed, as now, in complete safety?

To return to the review process of HMS Gannet, in about September 1998 the former Secretary of State for Defence was a welcome visitor to HMS Gannet when he presented the Wilkinson sword of peace to the squadron. At that time, the favoured option of Flag Officer, Naval Aviation, was that although all anti-submarine warfare aircraft would be based at royal naval air station Culdrose and that all future tasking would be met from there, search and rescue would be maintained at HMS Gannet with the presence of two Sea King aircraft, presumably to be replaced by Merlin in due course. What will happen when the Sea Kings go out of service in 2002? How will the search and rescue commitment be fulfilled, and what will replace Sea King?

Secondly, the defence of the Clyde would be fulfilled by detachments from Culdrose which would come up to the Clyde 10 times a year and receive infrastructure support from HMS Gannet. I am now aware, following my recent discussions with the trade union, that staff were informed that that was the preferred option, which would go to Ministers for approval.

By May of this year, however, I was still not aware of the outcome of the review, so I wrote to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, North (Mr. Henderson), the then Minister for the Armed Forces. We will all appreciate the uncertainty and worry caused to my constituents by the length of time that has been taken to carry out the review, with little or no definite information forthcoming with and with rumours abounding. My hon. Friend replied promptly and told me that the Navy was looking into the future provision of helicopter support in the Clyde area. He recognised my constituents' concerns about their future employment prospects and assured me that if any major changes were recommended as a result of the review they would be subject to full consultation in the normal manner and that all factors emerging from any consultation exercise would be taken into account.

23 Nov 1999 : Column 593

Will my hon. Friend the Minister confirm that that remains the position? The current rumour is that other options are being considered that may differ from the previously published intention. Can he confirm that, at the very least, the option that I have outlined, which was published post-SDR, will be maintained, if there are to be any changes at all? Will he confirm whether any significant changes or alternative proposals are being investigated?