| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
11.31 am
Lord Hope of Craighead: My Lords, as I have listened to these generous tributes, for which I and all my noble and learned friends past and present are truly grateful, it has struck me that what is really happening today is that the House is losing part of itself.
Lord Hope of Craighead: After all, my Lords, the appellate function, which it has fulfilled with such diligence and attention to detail over many centuries, has been unique to this House. It was never part of the functions of the other place. It is unique, too, in the role that it has fulfilled as an appellate court. Its capacity to combine, within this Chamber, the legal traditions of the three separate jurisdictions within the United Kingdom-England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland-is something that the courts of none of those jurisdictions on its own could have achieved. The Scots insisted, when the Treaty of Union was entered into in 1707, that there should be no right of appeal to any court that sat in Westminster Hall, where the patriot William Wallace was tried and condemned for treason. But that did not apply to your Lordships' House, so there was no obstacle to appeals from Scotland being heard here. The happy result of this combination-this historical accident, you might say-has been of immeasurable benefit to all three jurisdictions, and to the United Kingdom, due to the cross-fertilisation of ideas from these jurisdictions and a carefully balanced harmonisation which this system made possible.
The system has been unique, too, in what the Law Lords wear: no wigs, no robes, dressed simply as everyone else is in this House. The authority of the Law Lords is undoubted, but this is due to what they have said and written and what they have done, not to any kind of dressing up. The system has been unique in a respect that, in the end, was to be its undoing: the fact that the Law Lords were entitled to take part in the work of the House as a legislature and of its committees, just like everyone else.
As a result of the way the appellate jurisdiction has been operated since 1876, when the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary were first admitted to the House's membership, the House of Lords has become a byword for judicial work of the highest quality. As a brand name it has been unsurpassed. The reputation of the whole House has been greatly enhanced by it, throughout the common-law world and beyond-so much so that the decision to end the appellate jurisdiction caused almost universal surprise overseas. Why give up something that seemed so valuable?
21 July 2009 : Column 1515
Of course, we recognise that the die has been cast and now we must go our separate ways. If I may be so bold, your Lordships are on your own now and, as we take the appellate jurisdiction away with us, so are we. I can assure your Lordships that in the Supreme Court we will carry on many of the traditions that have been built up here by the 112 individuals who were privileged to have been appointed to this office, serving all three jurisdictions, wearing everyday business clothes and aiming to deliver judgments of the highest quality. Noble Lords will, of course, be welcome to come to the Supreme Court at any time as visitors, although preferably not all at once.
In recent years it was to the committees, such as the Committee on the European Union and Sub-Committee E in particular, that the serving Law Lords contributed most to the work of the House. In truth, it had become almost impossible for those of us who are still serving, and who would otherwise have wished to do so, to make any meaningful contribution to public business in this Chamber. Changing attitudes made it wise for us to refrain from speaking and voting, and changes in sitting times and the pressure of work on us made this element of self-restraint inevitable. Happily, those of us in the Supreme Court who are already Members of the House will be-if your Lordships will be good enough to approve of the House Committee's report this morning-allowed back into the precincts as if we were on leave of absence. We also hope to be able to make use of this privilege so that we can maintain contact with what goes on here. We look forward to the opportunity that retirement will offer us, as our disqualification is lifted and we have time to give, to follow the example of our predecessors, who gave-and, indeed, still give-so much to the work of the House in their retirement. For us on the Appellate Committee, as we leave the Chamber in a few moments to resume our judicial duties this morning upstairs in our Committee Room, it is not "adieu"-only "au revoir".
There is one last scene to be enacted before we leave. Today, your House rises. We still have 10 days to go before our term ends. There is the saying, "While the cat's away, the mice will play". Next week, as your Lordships will not be here, we will resume our ancient tradition of hearing appeals here in the Chamber. On Thursday afternoon we will sit here for the last time to deliver our last judgments in the House. Unlike the Last Judgment Day, this is an event the timing of which we can predict with absolute certainty, and we will all be here. Only when our last judgment has been given, at 4.50 pm on Thursday afternoon, will the appellate function of the House of Lords truly pass into history.
11.38 am
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, might I be permitted to add my tribute, in a small way, to the noble and learned Lords, both past and present? They have been a remarkable feature of the House. They have been admired and respected by everyone, not only in the House but outside it. Their knowledge of the law, clarity of opinion and relative humility in projecting their views; their ability to transmit their views in a way that ordinary people can usually understand; and the charm with which they have done it, have left us all-both inside
21 July 2009 : Column 1516
It must come to an end because it is said that people do not understand the difference between a political Lord and a Law Lord and, therefore, they should be housed separately. However, people never understand the niceties of other people's businesses in which they themselves are not involved. Not many people know how to butcher a pig. That does not really matter because, fortunately, a butcher does.
It is said that people who administer the law should not be involved with creating it, but those who have been involved all their lives in dealing with those who break the law have their own particular contribution to make in suggesting ways in which the law should be tightened. The views of the Law Lords were always valuable and cherished. When I had the privilege of serving as an ornament in the Home Office, and when we produced one of those frantically controversial Bills, such as the Home Office does produce from time to time, I remember the excitement which we all felt when it transpired that the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chief Justice was on our side and was going to speak in favour of what we were proposing. It gave the officials in the Home Office, not least the hapless Minister, great confidence that we might at least have been going somewhere near the right direction.
It seems a shame that this fine and select body of people should be excised from your Lordships' House to go across the road, to do the same work which they do at present-the same people, the same intellect, the same judgments but a different name and a different venue. That seems such a pity. The name "Law Lord" was a glorious name. In future, there will be no such thing as a Law Lord. I thought that in this mundane format in which we all seem to be operating, they would be called "Administrators of Justice, Grade 1", or some such. Fortunately, the powers that be-I never quite understand who the powers that be are-have been more generous than that and have given them the more exalted title of Justice of the Supreme Court.
In grieving the passing of the Law Lords-I do grieve their passing-I cannot help but think that it is all unnecessary. The Government have overseen the removal of most of the hereditary Peers-well, you can say, "That's all right, time for them to go"-the removal of the Lord Chancellor, with the shell of his office now being in the hands of a Member of another place, the removal of the Law Lords, and now, one gathers from the papers, that the poor right reverend Prelates are in the firing line. This is pretty drastic stuff by any standard. It is an assault on your Lordships' House and an assault on the constitution.
When these huge constitutional changes are made, it is seldom for the better and very often it is for the worse. What has happened to our knowledge of history, our love of history and our respect for history? Why have we lost the ability of taking pride in the privilege of holding the baton of history for a while? Once these changes are made, it merely encourages others to do the same. Now we have a Speaker walking about in just a suit and a gown, like a preparatory school geography master, all on the altar of change.
21 July 2009 : Column 1517
The Lords of Appeal in Ordinary have had a unique place in the history of this country; a unique place in your Lordships' House; a unique place in the affection and respect of your Lordships; and a unique place in the legal jurisdiction of the country. I join other noble Lords in thanking them for that. I wish them well in their new surroundings but I deeply regret their passing.
11.44 am
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, the tributes today to the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary on this historic day have been fitting. We celebrate the contribution that they have made to this House, to the law and to this country.
I hope that the House will forgive me if we also celebrate the contribution that has been made to this House by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth, who retires today. We bid au revoir to the current Lords of Appeal. We bid au revoir to the right reverend Prelate. We look forward to seeing them again in this House. With that, I commend the Motion.
Education: Teacher Training Courses
Question
11.44 am
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the extent to which teacher training courses encourage the use of fieldwork in teaching biology.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Children, Schools and Families (Baroness Morgan of Drefelin): My Lords, the Government fully recognise the value of good-quality fieldwork to engage and enthuse pupils in their science learning. We are doing much to promote the use of practical work by teachers in science lessons. Qualified teacher status standard Q30 requires that trainees must demonstrate that they can establish a purposeful and safe learning environment conducive to learning, and identify opportunities for learners to learn in out-of-school contexts, before being recommended by teacher training providers for QTS.
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reply, but given the lack of confidence of early-years science and biology teachers in teaching outside the classroom, will she consider reviewing the qualified teacher status standard Q30 to ensure that there is proper training for young teachers in fieldwork? Will she include in those requirements not just being able to recognise opportunities to teach outside the classroom but taking part during training in a school visit, and planning and leading at least one lesson outside the classroom? Before I sit down, perhaps I may say how much I will miss the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth, who is "education Bishop" and has worked with so many of us on many pieces of education legislation.
21 July 2009 : Column 1518
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I agree with the noble Baroness in everything that she said, not least her comments about the right reverend Prelate. I reassure her that the Government have listened very carefully to the views of the Field Studies Council, and the TDA will commence a review of the qualified teacher status standards, looking particularly at the issues she has raised about organising and delivering. The review will take place in April 2010. The consultation will include the issues that the noble Baroness is concerned about. I very much hope that those interested in promoting the improved confidence of the teaching force in fieldwork study will contribute fully to the review.
Lord Winston: My Lords, I declare an interest as a member of Imperial College London. Does the Minister remember that the Select Committee on Science and Technology has emphasised the importance of practical work in persuading children that science is valuable? Is she aware of the outstanding work that is done at Imperial College by Outreach, where we do a large amount of practical work with schoolchildren? Can the Government do everything that they possibly can to support this sort of activity throughout the universities, which helps to connect schools with universities and gives children aspirations to join universities?
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I am very much aware of the important work of universities such as Imperial College in connecting with science teaching in our schools, and in leading innovative approaches to practical teaching and developing important facilities. However, it is essential that we engage the entire scientific community in ensuring that science is exciting and challenging in schools. That means that we have also to work with leading partners such as the Wellcome Trust and science charities to ensure that we get the whole community behind our teachers in our schools.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, I have had the privilege of meeting the Field Studies Council to discuss these matters. May I follow the noble Lord, Lord Winston, and ask whether the noble Baroness agrees that those who are concerned about trying to recruit young people to take science at secondary school and university, and become part of our scientific community, all emphasise the need for starting in the primary schools? Field studies are important in the work of primary schools and can actually fire a young child's ambition to become a scientist.
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord completely. The new primary school curriculum has addressed the concern about the need to build confidence and provide opportunities for learning outside the classroom. The Government have committed to the Manifesto for Learning Outside the Classroom and are, as I told the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, reviewing the standard Q30. However, we need to take a whole range of measures, including, of course, encouraging more people to go into teaching science in schools.
Lord Broers: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Winston, mentioned the report of the Science and Technology Committee. I declare my interest, having chaired that inquiry into science teaching in schools. One difficulty that we identified was the fact that there is no satisfactory
21 July 2009 : Column 1519
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I agree that the role of technicians in schools is key. Through the national network of science centres, the professional development that is offered to teachers is now being opened up to technicians as well. However, I will take the question away and think about it further, because I do not have a full answer for the noble Lord.
Baroness Garden of Frognal: My Lords, for many secondary school pupils, residential field work is the most exciting part of their science education. In the 2012 Olympic site there is a unique opportunity for urban regeneration, as well as for restoration of a derelict river valley. What provision is being made for field work, both for teachers and students, on the 2012 site?
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I apologise that I cannot give the noble Baroness a proper answer to that question, either. I will take the question back, write to her and put a copy in the Library. Activities outside the classroom such as pond dipping and nature trails, which give an understanding of how the natural environment works, are a very important part of primary school learning. That continues into secondary school, too. The noble Baroness talked about the value of field work. It is important at GCSE and A-level, and will also feature in diplomas.
The Earl of Listowel: My Lords, is it easy for children to access school laboratories in school breaks and after school hours? What progress has been made in addressing health and safety issues concerning children accessing school laboratories?
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, the Government have invested heavily in developing science clubs that do exactly what the noble Lord is talking about. By involving volunteers from industry and universities, we can make sure that science clubs are accessible. People talk about health and safety being a challenge. Schools are very careful to consider health and safety. Science labs represent some challenges, but we have to encourage the sensible evaluation of risk. We must not stop children and young people taking risks in a measured and supported way.
European Space Programme
Question
11.53 am
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, following the selection of Major Timothy Peake as a member of the European Space Agency's astronaut corps, they will further their involvement in the European space programme; and, if so, how.
The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): My Lords, the Government are delighted that Britain has its first official astronaut and applauds
21 July 2009 : Column 1520
The Earl of Glasgow: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. As everybody knows, it has been more than 30 years since anybody walked on the moon and the only people who have walked on the moon have been Americans. Have the Government any plans for a British astronaut, or at least a European one, to walk on the moon as soon as possible through the help of the European Space Agency? Are the Government prepared to spend more of the space budget on exploration, which is more inspiring and glamorous, and less on the specialised unmanned satellite launches, on which most of the money is now spent? There is too much junk flying around the earth at the moment.
Lord Drayson: My Lords, the Government spend approximately £260 million a year on civil space research. We believe that that is an appropriate amount and that we get a tremendous return for that investment. It generates, for example, more than £6.5 billion of turnover for the UK within the UK space industry. We recognise that manned space exploration is important but we believe that by focusing our investment on those scientific areas where the UK has real critical mass and real leadership, in satellites and robotics, we can leverage that leadership in return for participating in manned space exploration through the ESA programme. That is why we are delighted that we now have our first British astronaut.
Lord Broers: My Lords, most of the funding for our space research comes from the science budget within the research councils. Most countries do not do that. Most countries establish a space agency which seems to me appropriate as much of the fallout and application of space research is in the military and commercial sector. Does the Minister think that that would be a better route for us to take as well? I declare my interest as chairman of Diamond Light Source, which is funded from the science budget.
Lord Drayson: My Lords, the noble Lord explains exactly the issue relating to the way in which we organise the investment in space. We have now launched a consultation to assess whether the current arrangements, whereby we have pooled funding from a number of different departments into the NSC, could be organised through an agency status to give better clarity and to strengthen our position in negotiation with international partners, such as within ESA.
Lord Winston: My Lords, I declare an interest as a member of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. Does the Minister not agree that manned space flight is extraordinarily expensive compared with unmanned space flight, given the extra payloads required to send men into orbit beyond the earth's gravity? Therefore, is it not right for most of our attention to be focused on unmanned space flight, which gives the best scientific return for money?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |