Fifth supplementary memorandum submitted
by the Judicial Appointments Commission
Thank you for your letter of 2 July requesting
further evidence in writing. We have answered your questions in
the attached note following the format set out in your letter.
As you will know, the Chairman wrote to Mr Beith
and Mr Vaz on 4 July setting out in detail the different categories
of selection exercises run in our first year of operation, and
enclosing a copy of our Annual Report. The enclosed memorandum
takes those categorisations as its framework and also draws on
the analysis in the Annual Report of the completed selection exercises.
Clare Pelham
Chief Executive
16 July 2007
Attachment
SUPPLEMENTARY WRITTEN EVIDENCE FROM THE JAC
1. THE JAC'S
CURRENT RECORD
Background
The JAC was launched on 3 April 2006. The first
six months from April-October 2006 were a transitional period
in which the JAC followed, broadly, the selection processes it
inherited from the then DCA, while designing its own processes.
The JAC processes were published on 31 October 2006.
There are four categories of exercise that have
been run since the JAC was established. These are:
1. Retained by the Lord Chancellor and run
entirely under the old DCA processes. (There were ten of these
retained selection exercises but they do not fall within the scope
of questions 1.1a) or b) because the selections were not made
by the JAC).
2. Started by the then DCA and then finished
by the JAC and run under the old DCA processes but with small
changes to comply with the Constitutional Reform Act.
3. Started by the JAC before October 2006
and run mostly under DCA processes but with more significant changes
required to comply with the Act.
4. Started by the JAC after October 2006
and run under the new JAC processes.
Note: Throughout this
section, the term "to date" has been taken to mean "to
30 June 2007", and a selection exercise is regarded as completed
when the Lord Chancellor has responded to the Commission's recommendations.
1.1 Which competitions have been completed
under (a) the old, and (b) the new selection rules by the JAC
to date?
(a) To date, the JAC has run and completed 9
selection exercises using the old DCA selection processes (which
therefore fall within categories 2 and 3 above). These are:
Completed between 1 April 2006 and 31 March
2007:
— Specialist Circuit Judge Mercantile,
Chancery, Technology and Construction (Manchester) and Specialist
Circuit Judge Chancery (Bristol and Birmingham) (section 87—3
vacancies—3 recommendations).
— Agricultural Lands Tribunal fee-paid
Area Chairman (North and Wales) (section 87—2 vacancies—2
recommendations).
— Trade Marks fee-paid Appointed Person
(section 87—1 vacancy—1 recommendation).
— Mental Health Review Tribunal fee-paid
legal member (section 87—53 vacancies—50 recommendations).
— Gambling Appeals Tribunal fee-paid
President (section 87—1 vacancy—1 recommendation).
— Chief Social Security and Child Support
Commissioner (section 87—1 vacancy—no recommendation
was made).
Completed between 1 April 2007 and 30 June
2007:
— Circuit Judge (section 94 list—107
names requested—102 names listed; section 87—47 immediate
vacancies—47 recommendations)
— District Judge (section 94 list—59
names requested—59 names listed).
— Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals
Panel fee-paid legal members (section 98 request for assistance—20
immediate vacancies—20 recommendations, including 3 for
Scotland).
(b) To date, the JAC has run and completed
4 selection exercises using the new JAC processes (which therefore
fall within category 4 above). These are:
Completed between 31 October 2006 and 31
March 2007:
— Special Immigration Appeals Commission
Chairman (section 87—1 vacancy—1 recommendation).
Completed between 1 April 2007 and 30 June
2007
— Senior Circuit Judge Designated Family
Judge (section 87—1 vacancy—1 recommendation).
— High Court (section 94 list—25
names requested—21 names listed).
— Senior Master and Queen's Bench Division
Queen's Remembrancer (section 87—1 vacancy—1 recommendation).
In addition to these exercises there have also
been recommendations for appointments to the Court of Appeal made
by a specially constituted committee of the Commission: further
details are provided below.
1.2 How many judicial appointment recommendations
have been made to date by the committee?
Background
Selection exercises may be run under different
provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005:
— A section 87 selection exercise is
run for the purpose of identifying persons suitable for immediate
appointment to specific judicial vacancies.
— A section 94 selection exercise is
run for the purpose of identifying people whose names should be
included on a list of those considered suitable by the JAC for
selection on request to a particular type of judicial office.
As requests to fill specific posts arise, a s 87 vacancy request
is sent to the JAC.
— section 98 requires the JAC to provide
any assistance requested by the Lord Chancellor under this section.
The Lord Chancellor may request assistance for the making by him
or by another Minister of the Crown of an appointment or recommendation
for appointment.
In compiling the figures below, we have only
counted as recommendations those made under s 87 and s 98 in respect
of completed exercises. We have counted separately the total number
of names put forward on section 94 lists. All JAC recommendations
to date have been accepted by the Lord Chancellor.
Answer
Between April 2006 and June 2007 the JAC made
161 recommendations in respect of completed exercises to the Lord
Chancellor.
Breakdown:
Between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007:
— 58 recommendations from the seven
exercises completed before 31 March 2007.
— 30 recommendations from a variety
of reserve lists created from competitions completed before 3
April 2006 by the DCA.
— 2 recommendations for appointments
to the Court of Appeal by a specially constituted Committee of
the Commission under section 80 of the Constitutional Reform Act.
Between 1 April 2007 and 30 June 2007:
— 69 recommendations from the exercises
completed between 1 April 2007 and 30 June 2007.
— 2 recommendations for appointments
to the Court of Appeal by a specially constituted Committee of
the Commission under section 80 of the Constitutional Reform Act
2005.
182 names were put forward on section 94 lists
from the three exercises completed between 1 April 2007 and 30
June 2007 but these are counted separately as indicated above.
See answer 1.1 above for a breakdown of recommendations
by individual selection exercise.
2. IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE
HIGH COURT
BENCH RECRUITMENT
PROCESS
2.1 The Commission for Judicial Appointments
suggested in 2006 the use of professional executive search specialists
to identify potential candidates for High Court competitions.
Has the JAC taken up this recommendation to introduce headhunting
for candidates for senior judicial office?
2.2 What are the reasons
for having decided for or against this recommendation by the Commission
for Judicial Appointments?
In its 2006 Annual Report, the Commission for
Judicial Appointments (CJA) raised the possibility of using "professional
search specialists", "either in-house or external"
as part of a wider discussion on identifying and encouraging promising
candidates to apply (paras 5.15-5.19):
"Selective use of professional search specialists,
either in-house or external, could be helpful especially in identifying
potential candidates and inviting them to apply. If external consultants
were to be used, it would be necessary to consider costs and the
fact that information about candidates would then be held externally.
So it would be necessary to balance independence/confidentiality
against accountability/cost". (Commission for Judicial Appointments
Annual Report 2006, p.59, para 5.19).
The JAC is fully aware that the CJA raised the
possibility of using professional executive search specialists
in a High Court exercise but notes it was a suggestion rather
than a recommendation.
The JAC continues to consider proposals for
widening the range of applicants for a High Court exercise, however
it is not clear that professional executive search specialists
would have sufficient expertise for the task. The CJA also noted
two major caveats —confidentiality and cost. The JAC agrees
that these are very significant factors to be taken into account.
The risk that candidates might lose confidence in the process
because of the involvement of external parties would be counterproductive.
3. OUTREACH PROGRAMMES
3.1 Could you list the outreach programmes
the JAC has undertaken?
The JAC has undertaken a wide range of outreach
activities across England and Wales. These include speaking engagements,
taking part in conferences and seminars, undertaking and hosting
visits, a programme of regional visits by the Chairman and organising
regular candidate roadshows. The JAC is supported in its outreach
work by a wide range of partners (eg the Law Society) who allow
it to use their existing networks of contacts to reach eligible
candidates.
The candidate roadshows are an important component
of the JAC Outreach programme (shown in bold in the list below).
Participation in these is free and they are aimed at everyone
who is eligible and thinking about starting a judicial career
or wishing to further their judicial career. Attendees at these
roadshows can hear more about what judicial office involves, meet
JAC staff and ask questions about the new judicial appointments
process.
Events organised or attended by the JAC as part of
its Outreach programme:
Between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007:
— (27 March 2006—UK Association
of Women Judges Annual Conference—Chairman).
— 10-11 April—JAC Roadshow: Preston.
— 2-3 May—JAC Roadshow: Cardiff.
— 3-4 May—JAC Roadshow: Birmingham.
— 4-5 May—JAC Roadshow: Bradford.
— 16-17 May—JAC Roadshow: London.
— 17 May—ILEX Presidential Luncheon
(Chairman).
— 11 July—JAC Solicitors Initiative
Event (Chairman).
— 26-27 July—Chairman's visit
to Cardiff and Swansea.
— 20 September—Specialist Jurisdiction
continuation seminar (Chairman).
— 20-27 September—JAC Roadshow:
London.
— 12 October—Society of Asian
Lawyers (Chairman).
— 13 October—Law Society Annual
Conference.
— 14 October—Black Solicitors
Network Anniversary and Awards Dinner (Chairman).
— 18 October—Association of Women
Barristers Annual Dinner (Chairman).
— 18 October—Council of the Birmingham
Law Society.
— 19 October—Judicial Studies
Board Induction Course.
— 4 November—Bar Council Annual
Conference.
— 6 November—Middle Temple Guest
Lecture (Chairman).
— 8 November—Bench Legal Managers
Conference.
— 10 November—Leadership Event
for Presiding Judges (Chairman).
— 22 November—Society of Construction
Law Event (Chairman).
— 4 December—National Legal Advisors'
Conference.
— 4-5 December—JAC Roadshow:
Leicester.
— 7-8 December—JAC Roadshow:
London.
— 5 and 6 December—JAC Roadshow:
Sheffield.
— 6 and 7 December—JAC Roadshow:
Preston.
— 7 December—DCA Staff Conference.
— 11 December—JAC Roadshow: Plymouth.
— 12 and 13 December—JAC Roadshow:
Swansea.
— 12 January 2007—Welsh Language
Awareness Seminar.
— 18 January—Legal Services Department
of the Welsh Assembly event.
— 19 January—Judicial Appointments
Trilateral Conference.
— 23 January—Fawcett Society
Commission on Women in the Criminal Justice System lunchtime event
(Chairman).
— 1 February—Solicitors' Diversity
Event, Wragge and Co.
— 22 February—London School of
Economics Student Law Society Seminar (Chairman).
— 12 March—Law Society Judicial
Diversity Seminar.
— 12 March—Scottish Judicial
Appointments Board diversity conference.
— 27 March—Centre for Crime and
Criminal Justice, King's College London event.
— 28-29 March—Chairman's visit
to Birmingham.
Between 1 April 2007 and 30 June 2007:
— 18 April—De Montfort University
Distinguished Guest Lecture (Chairman).
— 25 April—King's College London,
graduate student event (Chairman).
— 28 April—Sixth Biennial Minority
Lawyers Conference.
— 9 May—JAC Roadshow: London.
— 11 May—Franco British-Irish
Judicial Colloque.
— 15 May—JAC Roadshow: Cardiff.
— 4 June—JAC Roadshow: Liverpool.
— 6 June—JAC Roadshow: Newcastle.
— 28 June—Chairman's visit to
Cambridge.
In addition to these events, Commissioners and
staff attend a large number of occasions that are not separately
recorded.
3.2 How much have these programmes cost?
The cost of the time spent by the Chairman,
Commissioners and staff at outreach events is not separately identified.
However, a breakdown of costs for the JAC candidate roadshows
is available:
— Between 1 April 2006 and 31 March
2007 = £29,016.33 (includes £15,962.33 advertising costs).
— Between 1 April 2007 and 30 June
2007 = (according to the most recent available figures) £17,744.84
(includes £13,513.99 advertising costs).
The total expenditure on JAC candidate roadshows
to date (April 2006-June 2007) = £46,761.17.
In addition to the expenditure quantified above,
the JAC makes extensive use of staff and communications resources
for outreach purposes. For example, the JAC communications team
distributes a free newsletter called Judging Your Future
to an audience of approximately 3,200 people which includes information
about outreach activities.
4. STAFFING ISSUES
Background:
Before our launch, the then DCA gave a public
commitment to relocate the JAC outside London and the South East
by March 2008. It was recognised that this question mark over
our future location would make it difficult for the new organisation
to recruit permanent staff. The DCA therefore decided that the
JAC would be set up with DCA staff on secondment for periods up
to 2 years.
In addition, the JAC had no period of shadow
running, and therefore no scope to design new processes ahead
of launch. Under the transitional arrangements agreed with the
Lord Chancellor, the JAC inherited selection exercises that were
already underway or about to start. These followed selection processes
previously used by the DCA (now MoJ), and knowledgeable and experienced
staff provided continuity.
The Lord Chancellor agreed in October 2006 that,
if relocation was to occur, it would not take place before 2011.
This enabled the JAC to begin operations in earnest and to plan
for the recruitment of its own staff.
In his 12 March letter to the Committee,
Lord Falconer noted that there were 74 staff seconded to the JAC
from the DCA:
4.1 Of those staff
who have returned to the DCA, how many have been of (a) senior
leadership, (b) policy and (c) administrative support grades?
Please see Table 1 below.
(a) As of 30th June, no senior leaders (SCS)
have returned to work at the DCA (MoJ). However, one SCS member
of staff retired in August 2006.
(b) The majority of posts at span 4 to span
8 include both policy and operational work.
(c) As of 30 June, 8 span 3 staff (administrative
officers) have returned to the DCA (MoJ), and 5 either resigned,
retired or came to the end of their fixed-term contract.
Table 1
DEPARTURES OF JAC SECONDED STAFF
| 1 April 2006-30 June 2007
|
| Grade | Seconded staff from DCA who have left JAC*
|
| SCS | 1 |
| Span 8 | 5 |
| Span 7 | 2 |
| Span 6 | 8 |
| Span 4 | 13 |
| Span 3 | 13 |
| Faststreamer | 1 |
| PS/SPS | 1 |
| Total | 44 |
Notes:
Includes those who returned to the DCA, retired or resigned. Agency
staff and contractors are not included in the table but civil
servants on a fixed term contract are included.
4.2 Have those staff who have been seconded to the JAC
maintained the same line-management relationships with their existing
managers, if both parties have been seconded?
At launch the majority of line management arrangements for
DCA seconded staff remained the same. This was due to the need
to provide continuity and knowledge transfer in key areas. Many
of the selection exercise teams, for example, and therefore line
management structures remained the same to complete delivery of
the transitional selection exercises.
Line management arrangements have changed throughout the
course of the first year for reasons including:
(a) the return of approximately 40% of staff at the end of
their secondment periods and subsequent staff moves to ensure
a balance of knowledge and experience across the organisation;
(b) team changes in Courts and Tribunals Appointments Directorates
to implement the new JAC selection exercises;
(c) development of the Strategy and Corporate Resources Directorate
to deliver the Commission's strategic objectives;
(d) the recruitment of a new Director of Tribunals Appointments
in August 2006 (from the Home Office).
There will be further changes to line management during 2007/08
for reasons including:
(e) the development of JAC terms and conditions for approval
by the Lord Chancellor under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005
which will enable it to recruit staff directly;
(f) the return of a further 40% (approximate) of DCA seconded
staff toward the end of 2007-08, and the resulting recruitment
of new staff from across the public and private sectors on JAC
terms and conditions.
(g) the appointment of three new Directors during the year.
4.3 Have seconded staff whose DCA line managers have not
been seconded maintained those line management relationships across
the two bodies?
No staff within the JAC have line managers outside the organisation.
The Chief Executive's line manager is the Chairman of the
JAC, and her appraisal is countersigned by the Director General
of Legal and Judicial Services Group in MoJ.
4.4 What was the process by which staff were selected for
secondment, and were the standards and requirements used the same
as will be used to hire permanent staff?
Before the JAC was established arrangements were made for
members of existing DCA staff to be seconded. In most cases staff
were mapped into broadly equivalent positions to those they were
then undertaking.
Recruitment of permanent staff by the JAC is expected normally
to be by means of public advertisement (as in the case of the
3 SCS posts mentioned below) and a competitive selection process.
We are in the process of putting our own terms and conditions
in place and expect to recruit staff on our own terms and conditions
when the next significant tranche of secondees return at the end
of this financial year.
Arrangements to fill vacancies in the interim are:
(a) for vacancies that arise below SCS in the interim we are
recruiting from across the widest possible field of civil servants
to ensure we are able to select the best candidates, appointed
on secondment from their home departments; and
(b) we shall make appointments to three senior leadership
roles this year. MoJ exceptionally agreed to appoint any successful
candidate on MoJ terms and conditions until such time as we have
our own terms and conditions in place. This allowed us to actively
seek candidates from outside the civil service. Two of these posts
were recently advertised in the national press. In addition, an
externally advertised selection process was undertaken last year
for the post of Deputy Director (Corporate Resources) open to
candidates from the private and public sectors.
4.5 Have the contractual or pay conditions of any seconded
staff altered as a result of their secondment, and, if so, what
was the nature of these changes?
No member of staff's contractual or pay conditions have altered
as a result of their secondment to the JAC.
Where an appointment is made on promotion, pay will change
as a result of the promotion, but not as a result of secondment.
4.6 Are the seconded staff able to receive performance
related bonuses, and, if so, who sets the parameters according
to which these bonuses are rewarded?
When staff are seconded into the JAC from their home department,
they maintain their existing terms and conditions of employment.
For staff below SCS there are two processes for rewarding performance.
These are:
(a) an annual performance bonus. Staff performance is monitored
and assessed by their managers within the JAC and their home department
notified of their annual performance rating. If an individual
is assessed by the JAC as an outstanding performer, they are awarded
an annual bonus. The amount is set by the individual's home department,
in accordance with their performance scheme. In 2006-07, DCA seconded
staff marked as outstanding were awarded an annual performance
bonus of £400; and
(b) the JAC also has a reward and recognition policy. This
allows for special bonuses paid through salary of £100 or
over, small bonuses paid through salary of under £100, and
small gifts up to the value of £50 eg gift vouchers and team
celebrations.
The process for SCS Directors and Chief Executive performance
bonuses is as follows:
(c) the performance of Directors within the JAC is assessed
by the Chief Executive and Chairman. The performance of the Chief
Executive is assessed by the Chairman and Director General of
Legal and Judicial Services Group (MoJ);
(d) pay recommendations for base pay increases and bonus awards
resulting from an individual's performance assessment, are moderated
through the MoJ process and put forward to the MoJ Departmental
Pay Committee;
(e) following steps c) and d), the MoJ Pay Committee considers
the pay and bonus recommendations made by the JAC following moderation
alongside staff from across MoJ. Committee members examine the
supporting evidence provided, and, having made a relative assessment
of how individuals compare with those operating at broadly the
same level, then either confirm or alter the pay recommendation
accordingly;
(f) once they have reached final decisions on pay and bonus
recommendations, the Committee allocates financial awards to each
member of staff. Where JAC SCS members of staff are not seconded
from MoJ, their home departments are notified of the Committee's
final decision on any pay and bonus recommendation, and they then
make payments accordingly;
(g) bonuses are allocated by the Departmental Pay Committee
in accordance with guidelines issued by the Cabinet Office each
year following the Senior Salaries Review Body recommendations;
(h) the 2007 pay award process covering the performance year
1 April 2006—31 March 2007 is currently underway. As yet
no pay awards have been made to any JAC SCS staff.
| 
