Sarah Sackman
MP for Finchley and Golders Green · Labour · United Kingdom
“I think the hon. Gentleman is referring to an interview with my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield that took place in December, well before this House voted conclusively on Second Reading. Any ministerial team would have to take on this challenge. Unlike the Conservatives, we will not duck it. What my right hon.”
“Equality before the law should mean just that, and as my hon. Friend says, it is an important principle to bear in mind when we talk about barriers to access to justice, whether we are talking about the cost of representation, which we try to address through legal aid, or about the cost of transcripts.”
“The hon. Gentleman mischaracterises the Government’s policy, as so many do. We are preserving jury trials as a cornerstone of British justice, but it is no justice at all if someone is waiting years for that jury trial.”
“I agree with the hon. Gentleman that our magistrates are the backbone of our justice system. I meet magistrates from across the length and breadth of the land, and I have met the Magistrates Association. We have to make being a magistrate more attractive.”
“I am sorry to hear about the hon. Member’s constituent’s case. Technology in this area is a potential game changer. However, as with all technological adoption, particularly in the justice arena, we have got to ensure accuracy for the very reason she says.”
“The Government are reforming the family justice system to better support families and children. We are rolling out the successful child-focused courts nationally.”
The complete record
Every one of 602 lines we hold for Sarah Sackman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 13.
“I therefore welcome the introduction of this modernised structure to enable the best possible leadership, and to support our tribunal judges working within it. I commend clause 18 and schedule 3 to the Committee.”
“The reforms will provide a modernised, unified leadership structure for our tribunals, which will encourage morale, recruitment and career development for the tribunals judiciary, and will support better use of flexible deployment and consistent practice. I should say that since I have been the Minister for Courts, I have had the privilege and pleasure of working with two remarkable Senior Presidents of Tribunals, Lord Justice Lindblom and Lord Justice Dingemans. I have responsibility for tribunals, which form a huge part of where many of our citizens interact with our legal system, whether that is the employment tribunal, the special educational needs and disability tribunal, the social security tribunal or the property tribunal—I hope I have not forgotten one.”
“The provisions amend the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act to set out how the territorial split will operate for different statutory functions. Generally, they will reallocate functions by territory, so that the SPT will retain the functions in relation to judiciary or staff working primarily in Scotland and Northern Ireland, or to cases to be heard there, while the Lady Chief Justice will assume the functions in the same way for England and Wales. However, there are some nuances to this approach to safeguard operational flexibility and to support consistency across pan-UK tribunals. For some functions—for example, appointing chamber presidents for cross-UK chambers or approving practice directions—the Bill enables shared decision making. The schedule makes similar changes in respect of the employment tribunals, where required.”
“The provisions also bring the SPT role into line with heads of division by mandating a transparent appointment process, removing the option of a fixed-term appointment and providing for the SPT to be an ex officio member of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The Bill also creates a new statutory post of deputy head of tribunals justice, similar to the statutory deputy head roles that exist in respect of criminal justice and family justice. The LCJ will become the statutory owner of the SPT’s current functions relating to tribunals operating under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 in England and Wales. There are powers for the Lady Chief Justice to delegate those functions and, in practice, it is expected that most of them will be delegated to the SPT.”
“Clause 18 reforms the role of the Senior President of Tribunals and brings tribunals and their judiciary in England and Wales within the Lady Chief Justice’s leadership responsibilities. It gives effect to schedule 3, which reallocates the SPT’s existing England and Wales functions to the Lady Chief Justice. The SPT will continue to exercise statutory responsibility for some tribunals in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the territorial extent of tribunals will remain as now. The reformed office will retain the title of Senior President of Tribunals and will be equivalent to a head of division role.”
“I will begin by addressing clause 18 and schedule 3 together before moving to Government amendments 72 to 96. Clause 18 makes significant reforms to the leadership of tribunals, a change strongly supported by the senior judiciary. This is a key step in the One Judiciary programme, which was set up to achieve the long-standing shared ambition of the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice to have a single, unified judiciary across the courts and tribunals of England and Wales. As the Lady Chief Justice recently noted, the reforms recognise the unity of judicial work across jurisdictions and will support more flexible deployment of judges, common standards and a more inclusive culture. Lord Justice Dingemans, the Senior President of Tribunals, endorsed this legislation in his annual report.”
“Amendment 96, in schedule 3, page 95, line 4, at end insert— “57 In Schedule 5 (employment tribunal procedure rules: further provision)— (a) in paragraph 3, omit sub-paragraphs (3) and (6) (which insert into the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 provision repealed by this Act); (b) omit paragraph 28 (which inserts into the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 provision repealed by this Act).”— (Sarah Sackman.) This amendment would repeal provisions of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 which insert into the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 and the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 provision repealed by the Bill. Schedule 3, as amended, agreed to . Clause 19 Lay justices’ allowances Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
“(5C) The President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland) may not give practice directions without the approval of the Senior President of Tribunals.’; (f) in sub-paragraph (6), for ‘sub-paragraph (5)(a)’ substitute ‘sub-paragraph (5)’; (g) in sub-paragraph (7)— (i) for ‘sub-paragraph (5)(a)’ substitute ‘sub-paragraph (5)’; (ii) for ‘the approval of the Senior President of Tribunals if’ substitute ‘any approval’; (iii) for ‘sub-paragraph (5)(b)’ substitute ‘sub-paragraph (5A), (5B) or (5C)’.” This amendment would insert provision amending provisions of the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 so as to confer on the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales certain functions currently conferred on the Senior President of Tribunals.”
“(1B) The Senior President of Tribunals may give practice directions under paragraph 9 in relation to proceedings in employment tribunals in Scotland.’; (c) in sub-paragraph (2), for ‘The Senior President may not give practice directions’ substitute ‘Practice directions may not be given under sub-paragraph (1), (1A) or (1B)’; (d) in sub-paragraph (5), for the words from ‘of—’ to’ the end substitute ‘of the Lord Chancellor’; (e) after sub-paragraph (5) insert— ‘(5A) The President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal may not give practice directions without the approval of— (a) the Lord Chief Justice, and (b) the Senior President of Tribunals. (5B) The President of Employment Tribunals (England and Wales) may not give practice directions without the approval of the Lord Chief Justice.”
“(3) In Part 3 (proceedings in employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal), in paragraph 11 (giving practice directions)— (a) in sub-paragraph (1)— (i) for ‘The Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘The Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals, acting jointly,’; (ii) for ‘any proceedings’ substitute ‘proceedings in the Employment Appeal Tribunal’; (b) after sub-paragraph (1) insert— ‘(1A) The Lord Chief Justice may give practice directions under paragraph 9 in relation to proceedings in employment tribunals in England and Wales.”
“(1B) The Senior President of Tribunals may give practice directions under paragraph 5 in relation to proceedings in a Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal or Upper Tribunal whose business involves only the application of the law of Scotland or Northern Ireland.’; (c) in sub-paragraph (2), for ‘The Senior President may not give practice directions’ substitute ‘Practice directions may not be given under sub-paragraph (1), (1A) or (1B)’; (d) in sub-paragraph (4)— (i) omit the ‘and’ at the end of paragraph (a); (ii) after paragraph (a) insert— ‘(aa) the Lord Chief Justice, if the business of the Chamber to which the directions relate involves the application of the law of England and Wales, and’; (iii) in paragraph (b), after ‘Tribunals’ insert ‘, if the business of the Chamber to which the directions relate involves the application of the law of Scotland or Northern Ireland’; (e) in sub-paragraph (6)— (i) for ‘the approval of the Senior President of Tribunals if’ substitute ‘any approval’; (ii) for ‘sub-paragraph (4)(b)’ insert ‘sub-paragraph (4)(aa) or (b)’.”
“(2) In Part 2 (proceedings in the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal), in paragraph 7 (giving practice directions)— (a) in sub-paragraph (1), for ‘The Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘The Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals, acting jointly,’; (b) after sub-paragraph (1) insert— ‘(1A) The Lord Chief Justice may give practice directions under paragraph 5 in relation to proceedings in a Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal or Upper Tribunal whose business involves only the application of the law of England and Wales.”
“(4) After subsection (2) insert— ‘(3) In this section, “relevant tribunal proceedings” means proceedings in— (a) the First-tier Tribunal, (b) the Upper Tribunal, (c) employment tribunals, or (d) the Employment Appeal Tribunal.’ 56 (1) Schedule 3 (practice directions for online proceedings) is amended as follows.”
“55 (1) Section 32 (judicial agreement to certain regulations) is amended as follows. (2) In subsection (1)(a)— (a) omit the ‘or’ at the end of sub-paragraph (i); (b) at the end of sub-paragraph (ii) insert ‘, or (iii) relevant tribunal proceedings in England and Wales;’. (3) In subsection (1)(b)— (a) in sub-paragraph (i), after ‘First-tier Tribunal’ insert ‘in Scotland or Northern Ireland’; (b) in sub-paragraph (ii), after ‘Upper Tribunal’ insert ‘in Scotland or Northern Ireland’; (c) in sub-paragraph (iii), after ‘employment tribunals’ insert ‘in Scotland’; (d) in sub-paragraph (iv), after ‘Employment Appeal Tribunal’ insert ‘in Scotland’.”
“Amendment 94, in schedule 3, page 94, line 3, at end insert— “Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Act 2018 50A In the Schedule to the Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Act 2018 (authorised court and tribunal staff: legal advice and judicial functions), omit paragraph 40 (which inserts into the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 provision repealed by this Act).” This amendment would repeal provision of the Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Act 2018 which inserts into the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 provision repealed by the Bill. Amendment 95, in schedule 3, page 95, line 4, at end insert— “Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 54 The Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 is amended as follows.”
“(4) After subsection (2) insert— ‘(2A) In subsection (2), “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) where the tribunal member exercises functions wholly or mainly in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals; (b) in any other case, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.’” This amendment would insert provision amending provisions of the Wales Act 2017 so as to confer on the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales certain functions currently conferred on the Senior President of Tribunals.”
“(2) In subsection (1), for the words from ‘if’ to the end substitute ‘— (a) in England and Wales, if the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales asks the member to do so and the President of Welsh Tribunals agrees to the request being made; (b) in Scotland or Northern Ireland, if the Senior President of Tribunals asks the member to do so and the President of Welsh Tribunals agrees to the request being made.’ (3) In subsection (2), in the words after paragraph (b), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’.”
“50B In Schedule 14 (deployment of the judiciary), in paragraph 12, omit sub-paragraph (2) (which inserts into the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 provision repealed by this Act).” This amendment would repeal provisions of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 which insert into the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 provision repealed by the Bill. Amendment 93, in schedule 3, page 94, line 3, at end insert— “Wales Act 2017 50A (1) Section 63 of the Wales Act 2017 (cross-deployment of tribunal members and judges) is amended as follows.”
“Amendment 91, in schedule 3, page 94, line 2, leave out “the Crime and Courts Act 2013, in”. This amendment is consequential on amendment 90. Amendment 92, in schedule 3, page 94, line 3, at end insert— “50A In Schedule 13 (judicial appointments), omit the following provisions (which insert into the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 provision repealed by this Act)— (a) paragraph 30(3); (b) paragraph 43; (c) paragraph 44(2); (d) paragraph 45(2) and (4); (e) paragraph 46(2) and (6); (f) paragraph 47(4) to (6), (8), (9), (11) and (12).”
“(4) After subsection (1) insert— ‘(1A) In subsection (1), “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) in relation to the First-tier Tribunal in England and Wales, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales; (b) in relation to the First-tier Tribunal in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals.’” This amendment would insert provision amending provisions of the Mental Health Act 1983, the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987, the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and the Social Security Act 1998 so as to confer on the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales certain functions currently conferred on the Senior President of Tribunals. Amendment 90, in schedule 3, page 94, line 1, at end insert— “49A The Crime and Courts Act 2013 is amended as follows.” This amendment is consequential on amendment 92.”
“Social Security Act 1998 48D (1) Section 15A of the Social Security Act 1998 (functions of Senior President of Tribunals) is amended as follows. (2) For the heading substitute ‘Confidentiality in the First-tier Tribunal’. (3) In subsection (1), for ‘The Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘The appropriate office-holder’.”
“Amendment 89, in schedule 3, page 93, line 29, at end insert— “Mental Health Act 1983 48A In Schedule 2 to the Mental Health Act 1983 (Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales), in paragraph 5 (which provides for certain members of the First-tier Tribunal to act as members of the tribunal)— (a) in sub-paragraph (1), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’; (b) after sub-paragraph (1) insert— ‘(1ZA) In sub-paragraph (1), “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) in relation to a member of the First-tier Tribunal who exercises functions wholly or mainly in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals; (b) in any other case, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.’ Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 48B In section 33 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (acquisition order where landlord cannot be found)— (a) in subsection (2)(a), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales’; (b) after subsection (3) insert— ‘(4) Section 7A of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Lord Chief Justice: power to delegate) applies to the function of the Lord Chief Justice under subsection (2)(a) as it applies to a relevant tribunal function within the meaning of that section.’ Local Government Finance Act 1988 48C In Part 1 of Schedule 11 to the Local Government Finance Act 1988 (the Valuation Tribunal for England), in paragraph A18A (power for member of First-tier Tribunal to act as member of the Tribunal)— (a) in sub-paragraph (2)(a), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’; (b) in sub-paragraph (9), after paragraph (a) insert— ‘(aa) “the appropriate office-holder” means— (i) in relation to an FTT member who exercises functions wholly or mainly in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals, and (ii) in any other case, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, and’.”
“Amendment 88, in schedule 3, page 93, line 12, leave out paragraph 46 and insert— “46 In section 9 (assistance for transaction of judicial business)— (a) in subsection (1), in the Table (judges deployable to certain courts), in column 1 of entry 4A (the Senior President of Tribunals), after ‘Senior President of Tribunals’ insert ‘, if not an ex-officio judge of the Court of Appeal’; (b) omit subsection (1ZA).” This amendment would enable a holder of the office of Senior President of Tribunals who is an ex-officio judge of the Court of Appeal to act on request as a judge of the Crown Court (like all other judges of the Court of Appeal).”
“For provision enabling the delegation of any function of the Senior President of Tribunals, see section 8 of that Act.’ Rent Act 1977 43C In Schedule 10 to the Rent Act 1977 (rent assessment committees), in paragraph 5A (which provides for a member of the First-tier Tribunal to act as a member of a committee in Wales)— (a) the existing text becomes sub-paragraph (1); (b) in that sub-paragraph, for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’; (c) after that sub-paragraph insert— ‘(2) In sub-paragraph (1), “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) in relation to a member of the First-tier Tribunal who exercises functions wholly or mainly in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals; (b) in any other case, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.’” This amendment would insert provision amending provisions of the Agriculture Act 1947, the Lands Tribunal Act 1949 and the Rent Act 1977 so as to confer on the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales certain functions currently conferred on the Senior President of Tribunals.”
“(6ZB) Section 7A of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Lord Chief Justice: power to delegate) applies to any function of the Lord Chief Justice under subsection (6) as it applies to a relevant tribunal function within the meaning of that section.”
“of tribunals etc.), in paragraph 15A (which provides for a member of the First-tier Tribunal to act as a member of the Agricultural Land Tribunal)— (a) in sub-paragraph (1), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’; (b) after sub-paragraph (1) insert— ‘(1ZA) In sub-paragraph (1), “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) in relation to a member of the First-tier Tribunal who exercises functions wholly or mainly in Scotland or Northern Ireland, the Senior President of Tribunals; (b) in any other case, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.’ Lands Tribunal Act 1949 43B In section 1 of the Lands Tribunal Act 1949 (which makes provision including provision about selecting a surveyor for the purposes of section 58 or 106 of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845)— (a) in subsection (6), for ‘the Senior President of Tribunals’ substitute ‘the appropriate office-holder’; (b) after subsection (6) insert— ‘(6ZA) In subsection (6) “the appropriate office-holder” means— (a) in relation to the determination of compensation to be paid in respect of land in England or Wales, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales; (b) in any other case, the Senior President of Tribunals.”
“Amendment 86, in schedule 3, page 88, line 9, at end insert— “32A In Schedule 8 (tribunals and inquiries: consequential and other amendments), in paragraph 41, omit sub-paragraphs (3) and (6) (which insert into the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 provision repealed by this Act).” This amendment would repeal provisions of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 which insert into the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 provision repealed by the Bill. Amendment 87, in schedule 3, page 92, line 38, at end insert— “Agriculture Act 1947 43A In Schedule 9 to the Agriculture Act 1947 (constitution etc.”
“Amendment 84, in schedule 3, page 75, line 6, leave out “senior judge” and insert “person who holds high judicial office”. This amendment would enable functions of the Senior President of Tribunals to be exercised during any vacancy or incapacity by a holder of high judicial office in Scotland or Northern Ireland (as well as in England and Wales). Amendment 85, in schedule 3, page 75, leave out lines 12 and 13 and insert— “‘high judicial office’ has the same meaning as in Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (see section 60(2)(a)of that Act);”. This amendment is consequential on amendment 84.”
“(2) Where a person (“the delegator”) has a power to delegate a function under section 7A, 7B or 8— (a) any requirement that the delegator may exercise the function only with the concurrence of another person (“P”) does not prevent the delegator from delegating the function to P, and (b) if the delegator delegates the function to P, any such requirement is to be disregarded so far as the function is exercised by P. (3) In this section “the Lord Chief Justice” means the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales.’” This amendment would insert provision intended to clarify the effect of delegation powers under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, inserted or amended by the Bill, in cases where the function being delegated is exercisable jointly with, or with the concurrence of, the person to whom it is delegated.”
“Amendment 83, in schedule 3, page 70, line 21, at end insert— “18A After section 8 insert— ‘8A Delegation: supplementary (1) Where a function is exercisable, in a particular case, by the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals, acting jointly— (a) so far as the function is exercisable by the Lord Chief Justice, it is to be treated for the purposes of section 7A as a relevant tribunal function and may be delegated under that section, and further delegated under section 7B, accordingly (including to the Senior President of Tribunals); (b) so far as the function is exercisable by the Senior President of Tribunals— (i) it is to be treated for the purposes of section 8 as a function the Senior President of Tribunals has in that capacity and may be delegated under section 8 accordingly, but (ii) it may not be delegated under that section to the Lord Chief Justice.”
“Amendment 82, in schedule 3, page 70, line 9, leave out sub-paragraph (3) and insert— “(3) For subsection (2) substitute— ‘(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to functions of the Senior President of Tribunals under any of the following— section 29B; section 29D; section 46; paragraph 3 of Schedule 5; paragraph 2 of Schedule A1 to the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.’” This amendment is consequential on amendment 81.”
“(2B) After subsection (1A) insert— ‘(1B) The provisions are— section 7(7); section 7(8B) and (9); paragraph 1(1) of Schedule 2; paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 2; paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 3; paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 3; paragraph 2 of Schedule 4; paragraph 5(1) and (3) of Schedule 4; paragraph 5(5) to (8) of Schedule 4; paragraph 5A(3A) of Schedule 4.’” This amendment would insert provision amending section 8 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 to enable the Senior President of Tribunals to delegate to the Deputy Head of Tribunals Justice or an Upper Tribunal Chamber President certain functions to which subsection (1) of that section does not currently apply.”
“Amendment 81, in schedule 3, page 70, line 8, at end insert— “(2A) In subsection (1A)— (a) for ‘paragraph 1(1) or 2(1) of Schedule 2’ substitute ‘any of the provisions listed in subsection (1B)’; (b) for ‘a Chamber President of a chamber of the Upper Tribunal’ substitute ‘a person appointed as— (a) Deputy Head of Tribunals Justice, or (b) Chamber President of a chamber of the Upper Tribunal’.”
“Amendment 80, in schedule 3, page 70, line 7, leave out “(1)(b),” and insert “(1)— (a) in the words before paragraph (a), after ‘may’ insert ‘, subject to the following provisions of this section,’; (b) in paragraph (b),”. This amendment would make a change to the drafting of section 8 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Senior President of Tribunals: power to delegate) corresponding to the change made by amendment 72 to the drafting of new section 7A of that Act.”
“Amendment 78, in schedule 3, page 69, line 28, leave out from “to” to end of line and insert “a person appointed as— (a) Deputy Head of Tribunals Justice, or (b) Chamber President of a chamber of the Upper Tribunal.” This amendment would enable functions of the Lord Chief Justice under paragraph 1(1) or 2(1) of Schedule 2 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 that are delegated to a senior judge to be further delegated to the Deputy Head of Tribunals Justice. Amendment 79, in schedule 3, page 70, line 2, at end insert— “‘relevant Scottish office-holder’ and ‘relevant Northern Ireland office-holder’ have the same meaning as in subsection (1A) of section 7A (see subsection (8A) of that section);”. This amendment is consequential on amendment 77.”
“Amendment 77, in schedule 3, page 69, line 25, at end insert— “(1A) A function of the Lord Chief Justice may not be further delegated under subsection (1) to a person who— (a) is a judge, or other member, of the Upper Tribunal or First-tier Tribunal only by virtue of the person being a relevant Scottish office-holder or a relevant Northern Ireland office-holder, and (b) is not a Chamber President, or a Deputy Chamber President, of a chamber of the Upper Tribunal or of a chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.” This amendment would impose a limitation on the power to further delegate a function of the Lord Chief Justice under new section 7B of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 corresponding to the limitation imposed in relation to new section 7A of that Act by amendment 74.”
“Amendment 76, in schedule 3, page 69, line 21, after “may” insert “, subject to the following provisions of this section,”. This amendment would make a change to the drafting of new section 7B of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (further delegation of functions of the Lord Chief Justice) corresponding to the change made by amendment 72 to the drafting of new section 7A of that Act.”
“Amendment 75, in schedule 3, page 69, line 6, at end insert— “(8A) For the purposes of subsection (1A)— (a) a person is a ‘relevant Scottish office-holder’ if the person is— (i) a judge of the Court of Session, (ii) a sheriff in Scotland, (iii) the President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland), (iv) the Vice President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland), or (v) a member of a panel of members of employment tribunals (whether or not a panel of Employment Judges) established for Scotland; (b) a person is a ‘relevant Northern Ireland office-holder’ if the person is— (i) a Lord Justice of Appeal in Northern Ireland, (ii) a puisne judge of the High Court in Northern Ireland, (iii) a county court judge in Northern Ireland, (iv) a district judge in Northern Ireland, (v) the Chief Social Security Commissioner, or any other Social Security Commissioner, appointed under section 50(1) of the Social Security Administration (Northern Ireland) Act 1992, or (vi) a Social Security Commissioner appointed under section 50(2) of that Act (deputy Commissioners).” See the explanatory statement to amendment 74.”
“Amendment 74, in schedule 3, page 68, line 9, at end insert— “(1A) A function of the Lord Chief Justice may not be delegated under subsection (1) to a person who— (a) is a judge, or other member, of the Upper Tribunal or First-tier Tribunal only by virtue of the person being a relevant Scottish office-holder or a relevant Northern Ireland office-holder, and (b) is not a Chamber President, or a Deputy Chamber President, of a chamber of the Upper Tribunal or of a chamber of the First-tier Tribunal.” This amendment, together with amendment 75, would prevent the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales delegating functions relating to tribunals to a person who is a judge of the Upper Tribunal or First-Tier Tribunal only because the person holds a particular judicial office in Scotland or Northern Ireland.”
“This amendment is intended to clarify that the Lord Chief Justice’s general power under section 7A(1) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (inserted by the Bill) to delegate functions relating to tribunals is qualified by subsequent subsections of that section. Amendment 73, in schedule 3, page 68, leave out line 5. This amendment would remove redundancy in the drafting of new section 7A(1) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (inserted by the Bill).”
“Our proposals do not cut against that, but bring the judiciary across England and Wales into the notion of unity, with a lot of the benefits of being under a single leadership—sharing best practice and deploying judges across different jurisdictions—being enhanced, so that everyone can benefit without bleeding out the differences that rightly exist in our different courts and tribunals. Question put and agreed to . Clause 18 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Schedule 3 Leadership of tribunals Amendments made: 72, in schedule 3, page 68, line 4, after “may” insert “, subject to the following provisions of this section,”.”
“That reflects the clause as drafted and the intention behind it, from speaking to our judicial leadership. In my experience, I have certainly found our judicial and tribunal leadership to be progressive, reforming and more open to cultural change, scrutiny and improvement than perhaps might previously have been the case. I welcome that, because it is as it should be. The hon. Member is right, of course: tribunals are different. They are meant to be informal and feel different from going to the High Court, which is all terribly alienating to the ordinary person who is untrained. A tribunal is supposed to involve a relatively cost-neutral and more relaxed process so that the individual can participate in it.”
“For every magistrate we recruit and train up and who must gain experience, we are seeing people leave the magistracy, partly because we are not supporting the important role they provide society and supporting them to remain magistrates for longer. That is about expenses and recognising people’s service, which is why we are looking to provide rewards and outward recognition through a long service medal. Those are all important. Although the clause is technical, when I spoke to the Magistrates’ Leadership Executive and the Magistrates’ Association, they were delighted by it. They know that their members need to feel valued. Part of that is not making them feel undervalued by leaving them out of pocket. Even if the system were not reformed, this would be a good measure.”
“Subsection (2) outlines what matters may be addressed in the regulations and sets out what is and is not to be treated as the performance of a magistrate’s official duties, the circumstances under which expenditure of financial loss can be considered to arise from the carrying out of those duties, and administrative arrangements for making and determining claims. I realise that the clause sounds a little dry, but it is really important. We have talked about the important role that our magistrates play in our criminal justice system. Whatever one’s view of the Government’s reforms, they are being given more responsibilities and work to do, and we will need to attract more people. I think that the hon. Member for Chichester raised the important issue of magistrate retention.”
“The provisions in the Bill follow the recommendation of the independent review of the criminal courts to move the categories of magistrates’ expenses which may be reimbursed from primary to secondary legislation, which will provide the flexibility to update them more quickly and to respond to changes in the evolving needs of magistrates’ expenses. I turn now to the detail. Proposed new section 15(1) of the 2003 Act replaces the existing statutory categories of magistrates’ expenses with a delegated power enabling the Lord Chancellor to specify, in regulations, the categories of expenses or financial loss for which a magistrate can be reimbursed in connection with the performance of their duties. The power also enables regulations to provide for reimbursement of expenditure incurred or financial loss suffered as a result of those duties.”
“The clause will make it easier to make changes to the types of expenses that can be reimbursed so that we can more nimbly react to what the magistracy requires. It is right that our valued magistrates are reimbursed for reasonable expenses and should not feel out of pocket for serving their community. Section 15 of the Courts Act 2003 sets out three specific categories of reimbursable expenses: travel, subsistence and financial loss. However, those statutory categories are, in effect, over-prescriptive.”
“That is true. We should be doing what is set out in this good clause and I have nothing more to add. Question put and agreed to. Clause 19 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 20 Special provision when Crown Court sits in City of London Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
“The clause does not alter how that entitlement is exercised in practice; it ensures that the historic statutory entitlement continues to apply consistently when the Crown court sits in more than one location within the City. The City’s historic relationship with the Central Criminal Court does not affect judicial independence or integrity, and all judicial business will continue to be conducted by independent, legally qualified judges. I commend clause 20 to the Committee.”
“It is a brilliant resource, providing much needed additional Crown court capacity following more than £600 million of investment. Without legislative clarification, however, both the Old Bailey and the new courts at Salisbury Square would automatically be designated as the Central Criminal Court. That would cause operational confusion for court users and practitioners. Clause 20 therefore clarifies that the statutory title will continue to apply only to the Old Bailey. The clause also maintains the long-standing statutory entitlement of the Lord Mayor and aldermen of the City of London to sit as judges when the Crown court sits within the City. In practice, and as a matter of convention, they do not assert that entitlement in order to sit in hearings in criminal cases.”
“Clause 20 concerns the statutory title “Central Criminal Court”, which has been on the statute book since 1834 and refers, in practice, to the Old Bailey. Under existing legislation, the title applies to the Crown court sitting within the City of London. Historically, the only Crown court located within the City has been the Old Bailey, so the provision has operated without difficulty. From next year, however, I am absolutely delighted to say that the City of London Corporation’s new courts complex at Salisbury Square will open. It is fantastic; I have been to seen it—I had to do that politician’s thing of wearing high-vis and a hard hat. The complex is an amazing facility for London’s justice system, with modern courtrooms.”