Examination of Witness (Questions 40-44)
RT HON
JACK STRAW
MP
24 JULY 2007
Q40 Keith Vaz: Do you think it is
too big? This is a huge area.
Mr Straw: Look, there is always
going to be an argument about how you divide these areas and when
I was at the Home Office I had the police, asylum and immigration,
as you will remember, prisons, probation and then the rest of
the criminal justice system was elsewhere, and then I had this
very large number of what amounted to constitutional responsibilities
plus some slightly eccentric issues like falling satellites, hypnotists,
the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and the Church of England.
Now the split is slightly different so you have got policing at
the Home Office—because that is essentially what they are
doing, they are doing internal policing and border policing—and
the security service, so it has now become a classic, single-scope
ministry of the interior, for the reasons that were set out by
the Prime Minister. I have got the rest.
Q41 Keith Vaz: Do you think that
such a large department will open the question of more conflicts
of interest; you have the Courts Service and the Prison Service?
Mr Straw: I hope not is the answer.
My view is that we should treat this as settled now. I have always
been slightly sceptical about major machinery of government changes
because it uses up an awful lot of effort and there are always
issues about people being caught unawares, though sometimes it
is unavoidable. There have been two iterations of changes in the
responsibility between the Home Office and the Lord Chancellor's
Department (DCA) in the last six years; one that moved constitutional
affairs into what became the DCA and, secondly, moved prisons
and probation and a very large amount of criminal justice work
as well, so we are now leading on all of that area, on criminal
justice as well as sentencing policy. My advice to any prime minister
is to leave it where it is now; you have now got as it were a
classic European split as well between the Ministry of Justice
and the Ministry of the Interior: leave it and let us make it
work. I am very comfortable with my responsibilities; of course
they are substantial but it is my job to make them work and on
any one day if there is a serious problem somewhere in one of
the prisons which I cannot handle I will be offered career advice
by colleagues on all sides of the House of Commons.
Keith Vaz: Thank you, Lord Chancellor.
Q42 Chairman: Let us return to Mr
Vaz's earlier point. Have you got a timescale for resolving this
really quite significant dispute with the senior judiciary, or
are you content to remain in a situation where the Lord Chief
Justice considers that there is a significant constitutional issue
unresolved? That cannot be a happy state of affairs, can it?
Mr Straw: I do not wish there
to be any significant issues unresolved with the Lord Chief or
the senior judiciary. Generally you resolve these issues by a
process of intense discussion, but above all by building up confidence.
I understand why the senior judiciary were concerned about what
happened.
Q43 Chairman: You are drifting off
my question which is about the timescale.
Mr Straw: I am working on it as
quickly as I can, all right, alongside dealing with the prisons
and the constitutional agenda. I have seen establishing effective,
close and constructive relations, but respectful ones, with the
senior judiciary as one of my three top priorities.
Q44 Keith Vaz: Is there a timetable?
Mr Straw: Have I got a timetable
in my mind? The direct timetable is going to be October rather
than November, but am I intending to deal with this swiftly, yes.
Am I certain that I will be in exactly the same place as the senior
judiciary; no, I am not, but I hope so.
| 
