| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I am glad to see the noble Lord, Lord Peyton of Yeovil, back—I hope with a new hip that works better than the last one. The new arrangements that we propose; namely, the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs performing the ministerial functions and the Lord Chief Justice being the head of the judiciary, as a combination, will provide the sort of protection that is appropriate today.
Lord Henley: My Lords, as the noble and learned Lord will be sitting on the committee that will be examining his abolition, can he confirm that he will not be able to give evidence to that committee, and that other Ministers—including the Prime Minister—can give evidence to that committee about the origins of the desire to abolish his post?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I very much hope that I can give evidence, and I very much hope that the committee will agree that I do give evidence.
Lord Goodhart: My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that the respect for either of these offices depends on the willingness of the Prime Minister of the day to appoint to that office a person who is worthy of holding it? Does he also agree that if a future Prime Minister were to appoint an individual unworthy of that respect, the grandeur and antiquity of the title of the office would not, and should not, guarantee respect for that person?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, it is a very important office, and of course it must be held by someone who is worthy of it. The fact that it is an important office does not mean that we cannot, after proper scrutiny, take steps to improve the discharge of the functions presently performed by the Lord Chancellor.
Lord Waddington: My Lords, will the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor do his best to ensure that the deliberations of the Select Committee on the Constitutional Reform Bill do not end in a cosy lawyers' carve-up? Should not the object of the exercise be to ensure that we finish with a structure that is not just acceptable to judges and lawyers, but commands the confidence of the people because it does not involve the scrapping of well tried systems and the abolition of well respected offices?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I feel that I can answer this question as one lawyer to another. I am sure that the important thing is to avoid any sense that there is a cosy carve up between lawyers, because that would not have the confidence of the people. I entirely agree with almost all that the noble Lord said. I do not agree with the proposition that we cannot provide a system. Indeed, I believe that we can provide a better system than the one that presently exists, if we make the necessary changes that we propose in the Constitutional Reform Bill.
Lord Renton of Mount Harry: My Lords, did the noble and learned Lord have the opportunity to listen to "Breakfast with Frost" on Sunday, in which Peter Hain, the Leader of the House of Commons, in answer to a question from David Frost about House of Lords reform said:
- "I think instead of just looking at composition we will also seek to curtail the powers of the Lords . . . we need to bring down the period that it can frustrate the will of the Commons, from a year to under a year"?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, sadly, I missed "Breakfast with Frost" last Sunday. The relationship between the House of Lords and the House of Commons is right at the heart of any issue relating to Lords reform. I would not wish to say at this stage what the right course is, but, plainly, the issue should be examined.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, does not the fact that it was only after the former Lord Chancellor, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg, had withdrawn his name from the list of speakers who were to attack Clause 14 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Bill answer the question?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, there was an issue with Clause 14 relating to the judicial review ouster. Many people, including the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg, raised issues about that. The Government listened and withdrew the judicial review ouster.
Lord Selsdon: My Lords, if and when the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor commits hara-kiri,
who will stand between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York in order of precedence in this country?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I do not know. They may stand next to each other.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, does the noble and learned Lord agree that respect should be earned, whether it is for an office or for an individual?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I do.
Yarl's Wood
2.51 p.m.
Baroness Williams of Crosby asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When the inquiry by the Prisons Ombudsman on the allegations of bullying and intimidation of detainees at Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre will be published.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, my honourable friend the Minister for Citizenship, Immigration and Counter-Terrorism will make arrangements for the publication of Stephen Shaw's report as soon as possible following her consideration of its content and findings.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, I believe that the report reached the Minister some time towards the end of February. On 11 December, he pledged to the House that it would be published as soon as possible. Can he give us any indication of when it will be published?
Secondly, why did the Prisons Ombudsman, who conducted the review, interview no past detainees, only current detainees? Past detainees would be freer to speak their mind and give evidence than current detainees, who might be concerned about their status.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I cannot be more specific about the publication of Stephen Shaw's report. As I indicated, a draft was submitted earlier this year—on 24 February. With regard to the interviews, my understanding is that detainees spoke to the inquiry team, as did members of staff. The inquiry team spent two weeks at Yarl's Wood, making sure that it had the opportunity to speak to those who had been detained and to staff as well. A fairly lengthy time and great care were taken to record as much as possible during the inquiry.
Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: My Lords, can my noble friend tell your Lordships' House what plans there are to rebuild the bit of Yarl's Wood that was destroyed in the fire? If there are no plans to develop the site, what will happen when, in two years' time, the Oakington immigration reception centre has to close
because of housing development on the site, given the Government's ambition to expand the estate for the holding of some of those who claim asylum?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the first phase of Yarl's Wood has already reopened and provides accommodation for 60 single females. It reopened on 28 September last year. I understand that there will be a progressive reopening of the undamaged part of the centre, which will eventually accommodate up to 400 people, comprising single females and families. That should be complete by December of this year.
Viscount Bridgeman: My Lords, what progress is being made in addressing the specific criticisms in the report produced in April 2003 by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons on the five immigration centres that the provision of interpreters and translated documents was very poor?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, it is hard to provide the noble Viscount with a specific response. I recognise that it is an important issue. I know that the Home Office has been addressing it and that great effort is made to ensure that the sort of services that are required for proper communication to take place are put in place and that those who are detained have access to their rights.
The Lord Bishop of Worcester: My Lords, will the Minister reassure the House that the delay—if there is one—in publishing the ombudsman's report is not related to any distinction between publicly and privately run institutions, in terms of the readiness to publish critical documents?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am more than happy to give that reassurance. It is irrelevant whether the operators of any of Her Majesty's Government's institutions are public or private. Lessons must be learnt, if mistakes have been made. Given the thoroughness with which Stephen Shaw approaches such matters, I am sure that he will have provided the Minister with the fullest possible outline of what took place. I am sure that the recommendations will be carefully considered.
Lord Carlisle of Bucklow: My Lords, the Minister said that the report of the Prisons Ombudsman had been in the hands of Ministers for some weeks. Why is he unable to say when it will be published?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, no doubt, the Minister is giving the report very careful consideration and taking its recommendations seriously.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page