Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-73)
HON MR
JUSTICE HODGE
OBE AND HON
MR JUSTICE
COLLINS
21 MARCH 2006
Q60 Keith Vaz: Given the lessons
to be learned from Stoke and Bradford, where the Lord Chancellor
says he had to abort the process and described it to this Committee
as chaotic, you do not seem to share that kind of description,
you just felt it was an ongoing process.
Mr Justice Hodge: He took the
view that particular competition was chaotic.
Q61 Chairman: Somebody must have
advised him to that effect.
Mr Justice Hodge: There were terrible
stories about—cupboards—papers sitting in people's
drawers.
Q62 Keith Vaz: Do tell.
Mr Justice Hodge: That is one
of the stories. Some official had them in a drawer and they were
not available in the right sort of way. All of that was a contributory
factor to why he pulled the competition. We—the judges—were
not consulted about the pulling of the competition.
Q63 Keith Vaz: Are you comfortable
with the fact that 80 members of staff from the DCA Judicial Appointments
are going to be automatically transferred to the new Judicial
Appointments Commission, bearing in mind that the Lord Chancellor
himself has described some of these processes as chaotic? Are
we confident that none of these 80 people involved in this process
is going to be transferred to the new department?
Mr Justice Hodge: I cannot say
who is going to be transferred but my understanding is that on
the whole the bulk of the people who are involved in judicial
appointments in the DCA are moving over to the JAC, and one would
expect that to be the case. I have been involved in judicial competitions
over a number of times, nearly all in the asylum world, and it
might disappoint you but actually the system has got better. Now
it is not perfect, and it is incredibly frustrating for any individual
when their career is on the line and their papers are not handled
properly. You can imagine the feeling of those who applied for
the Stoke and Bradford competition, how fed up they were and it
was bad for morale that all of that happened. They have been working
very hard within the DCA to get it right, it still frustrates
us sometimes when they do not. I am not complacent about it but
it is certainly an improved system
Mr Justice Collins: When I was
involved I must say I was very impressed with the quality of the
DCA people who dealt with the matters and sat on the committees
with me.
Chairman: This was not a normal occurrence?
Q64 Keith Vaz: It was a blip.
Mr Justice Collins: It sounds
to me like a blip and it may not have been any of those who were
directly involved who were to blame, I do not know. The story
was told, it could have been any official at a low level who received
the documentation and was supposed to put it in order but did
not put it in order. One does not know but I do not think one
can assume from what has been said that it was those who have
been moved over who were necessarily in any way to blame.
Q65 Chairman: Moving on, the Home
Office is seeking to establish a points based immigration system.
Now we have gone over today things which perhaps should have been
anticipated when previous policy decisions were made. What kind
of consideration has been given, and in particular have you been
drawn into, about the potential implications for your courts of
a points based immigration system?
Mr Justice Collins: The answer
is as far a I am concerned none. That is personal. It may be that
I have not asked specifically whether the administration in my
court have been. I do not think so is the answer because it is,
after all, a policy matter where perhaps the view is taken it
is not really for the judiciary to be involved.
Q66 Chairman: That is not the issue
I am putting to you.
Mr Justice Collins: I know.
Q67 Chairman: The experience we have
had of a number of policy decisions which one has taken, their
consequences need to be anticipated.
Mr Justice Collins: Yes. Certainly
when I was President of the IAT I was involved in discussions
of that sort. I think they might be valuable provided, of course,
they are put on the basis of what might be the effect of a particular
approach. It may give some information which will help those who
have to make the decision to make the right decision.
Q68 Chairman: Do you think the number
and type of appeals going to the IAT will be significantly affected
by what you understand the system to be?
Mr Justice Hodge: Probably. We
do not think we get all that many work applications but we get
lots of student applications and they will go. I am likely to
be corrected about this but people are talking in the region of
25-30,000 appeals a year in relation to students which might drop
out of the system. You heard what I have said about the huge increase
in volume of cases, and they are certainly not all students. I
rather suspect looking at it with a bit of historical view that
although there will be a significant reduction of student case
numbers probably, because I have already said so on previous occasions,
it may not make a huge difference to the workload of the tribunal
because numbers who want to come in and use the rest of the appeals
system are going up all the time.
Q69 Chairman: You have not been involved
in any discussions yet?
Mr Justice Hodge: No, we have
not been asked about this at all, no. As Andrew says we get very
closely involved once the policy decisions are in place, and you
have to produce procedure rules and those kinds of things.
Q70 Chairman: As long as you have
sufficient time. The Minister referred at one point from a standing
start to completion in the best part of a year and a half to two
years. At a relatively early stage in that timetable you have
to be consulted about what it is going to mean for the judges
you require and the support you require?
Mr Justice Hodge: Yes.
Q71 Chairman: Is it a general feature
of the system that you do not get asked until rather late in the
day about the implication of changes?
Mr Justice Collins: I do not think
I am really in a position to know necessarily because the question
of judicial manpower is obviously not for me and the impact on
the judiciary will be a matter for the Lord Chief Justice and
clearly his office on the whole. If he wants to ask me he will
and I will give such information as I can. It has not been, has
it, in the past, certainly, part of the process that judges are
involved to any great extent. I think that has been changing to
some extent over the years but it is a change that has to be very
carefully watched, for obvious reasons. I like to think—and
indeed it has been my experience—that the Departments, both
the DCA and the Home Office, have been more willing to discuss
with the judiciary possible solutions and possible effects of
any decisions. As Henry says we have always been involved in the
procedure rules, certainly so far as the Tribunal is concerned.
Mr Justice Hodge: I sit on an
appeals board with representatives of the DCA and the Home Office.
That is specific to asylum and immigration but there are a number
of DCA boards which now have representation from much more senior
judiciary than me, as you know, I am sure. That is part of the
slightly greater involvement that the judges are having in the
policy issues. The Asylum Appeals Board looks at things like policy
and we talk about it.
Q72 Chairman: It ought to be a natural
corollary of dealing with something this Committee has criticised
in the past, which is the Home Office making decisions which have
enormous consequences for the budget of the Department of Constitutional
Affairs. The DCA has not had much input into those decisions.
If they are going to have an input then some of the people will
have to ask if the judiciary have some idea of what the practical
implications are?
Mr Justice Collins: Whether or
not that will become more the case after April once the Court
Service is effectively under the aegis of the Lord Chief Justice
and is more separate from the DCA than it is at the moment, I
do not know. I would have thought that is likely to have an effect
on the way these sorts of matters are approached.
Mr Justice Hodge: In Asylum and
Immigration we are part of a single asylum budget, as you know,
which includes the Home Office and NASS. That might change in
the future and some elements of the DCA want to create a tribunals
budget which will have us within it and the rest of the tribunals
service within it. There is a bit of ring-fencing at the moment.
Q73 Chairman: Is there anything either
of you would like to add?
Mr Justice Hodge: No, thank you
very much.
Mr Justice Collins: I do not think
so. Thank you.
Chairman: We are very grateful to you
for your help this afternoon.
| 
