| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Peter Duncan: In the hon. Gentleman's endeavour to clear up confusion, will he clarify one thing? The part-time Leader of the House said that the Scotland Office and the Wales Office remain with exactly the same staff and exactly the same duties. The part-time Secretary of State for Scotland said Upstairs that the Government will obviously make changes, but that they will have to speak to staff first. Which is it? It is the Government's confusion: sort it out.
Mr. Leslie: I take back what I said about the hon. Gentleman. I now do not think that he has any chance of becoming shadow Secretary of State for Scotland. [Hon. Members: "Answer the question."] Well, read my lips, as someone once famously said: the Scotland Office exists, the Wales Office exists and the relevant Secretaries of State hold their civil servants accountable for what they do. What is the Conservative party's attitude to that? Forget about doing the right thing: it opposes for the sake of a press release.
While the Conservatives are obsessed with process, the Government will get on with substantial modernisation. The changes are right and straightforward. I am pleased to have the opportunity to debate our continuing drive to modernise the constitution and public services by creating a new Department for Constitutional Affairs, to which I am extremely pleased to have been appointed. The new Department, with a new Secretary of State, will be able to focus more effectively on making the courts work on behalf of the public.
Keith Vaz: I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment to his new Department. In strongly welcoming the appointment of Lord Falconer to his new post, which I believe he will do admirably well, will my hon. Friend confirm, because we are talking about
extremely important constitutional changes, that there will be the widest possible consultation among the professions and the judiciary before any decision is made on a judicial appointments commission?
Mr. Leslie: I unreservedly welcome my hon. Friend's contribution. He is right. There will be the widest possible consultation. The hon. Member for Beckenham asked about consultation documents, which we will issue before the summer. Many hon. Members will wish to contribute. We want to make the system work better, but we want to make it work better for a purpose. We must have a more representative, more outward-looking court system. That is important.
I should like to make a few comments about some of the points that have been made, with specific reference to Scottish and Welsh Cabinet Ministers. We are putting in place better arrangements for the conduct of Scottish and Welsh business after the successful bedding-down of devolution, which naturally leads to an adjustment of the scale of the jobs of Scottish and Welsh Secretaries. My hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies), in his excellent speech, highlighted that matter, as did my right hon. Friend the Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes) in his inimitable way. There is continued accountability of the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales to the House, and they will also undertake other UK functions, undertaking all necessary policy and business matters in the same manner as previously. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude) for his measured contribution. He said that there is no constitutional impropriety, and nothing that is morally reprehensible, which, coming from the Conservative party, is a useful comment.
As for the Scotland and Wales Offices, my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell), the Father of the House, and the right hon. Member for Horsham asked specific questions about the organisation of the civil service. They wanted to know for whom civil servants will work if they serve Scottish and Welsh Ministers. There is a significant change, as the Scotland and Wales Offices will now come under the umbrella of the Department for Constitutional Affairs. They will have one permanent secretary, and pay and appointment arrangements will be streamlined, stable and simplified. My hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow specifically asked to whom those civil servants were accountable. The answer is that they are accountable to the Welsh and Scottish Secretaries. There are many precedents for that. For example, we have had a Minister for Women in the Department of Trade and Industry, yet staff serving that Minister are based in the women's unit in the Cabinet Office. There is therefore ample precedent for such accountability.
Mr. Bacon: In the light of what the Minister said about the permanent secretary, will he clarify whether there is now only one accounting officer, and whether the old Scotland and Wales Offices no longer have accounting officers? Is that the case or not?
Mr. Leslie: Sir Hayden Phillips, the permanent secretary for the Department for Constitutional Affairs, will be the accounting officer; I hope that is clear.
Major reforms are needed to secure the correct separation of powers between the Executive and the legislature on the one hand and the judiciary on the other.
Mr. Leslie: A transparently independent judiciary is widely accepted as a laudable aim, even, I suspect, by the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve). We have announced that we will consult on an independent judicial appointments commission for England and Wales, and I am glad that the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) welcomed that. Eventually, we intend to take the selection process for judges out of the hands of politicians, which will reinforce judicial independence. Scotland already has such a commission, and Northern Ireland is about to have one established.
Mr. Leslie: As the hon. Lady is so persistent, I shall give way to her.
Mrs. Lait: Can the hon. Gentleman tell me whether the Scotland and Wales Offices will continue to issue separate departmental reports.
Hon. Members: Oh, a big issue.
Mr. Leslie: To discuss that issue, the Opposition cancelled an Opposition debate on education. I wonder whether members of the public watching our debate will realise that the prospects for a future Conservative Administration hang on the issuing of departmental reports—[Interruption.]I look forward to the next Conservative manifesto.
I want to talk about the supreme court, because it is extremely important. We will consult on the establishment of a supreme court, rather than having the second Chamber of Parliament as the highest court in the land. Our proposals will take the Lord Chancellor, a politician, out of the final Court of Appeal, and establish a supreme court of appeal separate from the legislature. That move has received wide support. However, the Conservative party is clearly struggling over whether it supports or opposes it, either in principle or in general.
Mr. Leslie: I wonder whether the Conservative party has an official view on the idea of—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman, but it would help good order in the House if he indicated whether or not he is willing to give way, so that we do not have several hon. Members on their feet at the same time.
Mr. Leslie: I appreciate that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and shall give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen).
Mr. Allen: I hope that my hon. Friend takes seriously the important points made by the Opposition. I am
waiting for the question about whether the tea trolley in the Wales Office goes round at 11.20 or 11.25 am. I hope that my hon. Friend has the answer, not least because we dropped a debate on student fees to hear it. Will he return to the trivia of the debate and do something that our right hon. Friend the Leader of the House failed to do today—get an answer from the Opposition on whether they are in favour of a supreme court and a judicial appointments commission, and, if they are not, whether they will abolish them, should they ever come to power again?
Mr. Leslie: It is rare for the Opposition to clarify their views on such matters in Opposition day debates. No doubt we will have myriad written parliamentary questions from the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) about tea trolley issues, and I am sure that in due course Hansard will be full of answers to those. [Interruption.] I am assured by the Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Islwyn (Mr. Touhig), that the Wales Office has no tea trolley. I am happy to pass on that assurance to the House.
Mr. Leslie: I shall not give way for the moment because in the short time that I have left, I want to speak about the role of the Lord Chancellor in Parliament.
David Maclean (Penrith and The Border) rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.
Question, That the Question be now put, put and agreed to.
Question put accordingly, That the original words stand part of the Question:—
The House divided: Ayes 183, Noes 327.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |