DOCSLIB.ORG

The Office of Lord Chancellor — Evidence

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Office of Lord Chancellor — Evidence SELECT COMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION The Office of Lord Chancellor Oral and written evidence Contents Sir Alex Allan KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Constitutional Affairs then Ministry of Justice, 2004-07, and Sir Thomas Legg KCB, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department, 1989-98 — Oral Evidence (QQ 63-75) .................................................................. 4 Dr Gabrielle Appleby, Deputy Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit, University Of Adelaide — Written evidence (OLC0018) ........................................................................... 17 Archives and Records Association — Written evidence (OLC0024) ........................................ 25 Association of Personal Injury Lawyers — Written evidence (OLC0015) ................................ 28 The Bar Council — Written evidence (OLC0026) ..................................................................... 31 Bindmans LLP — Written evidence (OLC0023) ........................................................................ 38 The Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law — Written evidence (OLC0022) .............................. 41 Chartered Institute of Legal Executives — Written evidence (OLC0017) ................................ 43 Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, 2010-12, and Rt Hon Lord Falconer of Thoroton, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, 2003-07 — Oral Evidence (QQ 76-85) ......................................................................... 50 Mr Terence Ewing — Written evidence (OLC0007) ................................................................. 64 Rt Hon Lord Falconer of Thoroton, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs, 2003-07; and Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, 2010-12 — Oral Evidence (QQ 76-85) ......................................................................... 65 Dr Clive Field, University of Birmingham, and Professor Michael Moss, Northumbria University — Written evidence (OLC0013) .............................................................................. 66 Mr Graham Gee, University of Birmingham — Written evidence (OLC0006) ......................... 67 Mr Graham Gee, lecturer, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, Professor Andrew Le Sueur, Professor of Constitutional Justice, University of Essex, and Dr Patrick O’Brien, Research Associate, University College London — Oral Evidence (QQ 1-15) ............ 75 Government: Ministry of Justice — Written evidence (OLC0028) .......................................... 90 Government: Rt Hon. Chris Grayling MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, and Rosemary Davies, Legal Director, Ministry of Justice — Oral Evidence (QQ 43-62)......... 95 Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP, Attorney-General, 2010-14, and Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC, Attorney-General, 2007-10 — Oral Evidence (QQ 86-94) ............................................... 114 Rt Hon. the Lord Hamilton, former Lord Justice General of Scotland and Lord President of the Court of Session (2005-12) — Written evidence (OLC0016) ................................................. 126 Professor Robert Hazell, University College London — Written evidence (OLC0014) .......... 130 Mr Ruairi Hipkin — Written evidence (OLC0008) .................................................................. 132 Lord Hope of Craighead, Second Senior Law Lord then Deputy President of the Supreme Court, 2009–13, Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2008–13, and Lord Woolf, Law Lord, Master of the Rolls, 1996–2000 and Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2000–05 — Oral Evidence (QQ 30-42) ....................................................................... 138 The Howard League for Penal Reform — Written evidence (OLC0019) ................................ 155 Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2008–13, Lord Hope of Craighead, Second Senior Law Lord then Deputy President of the Supreme Court, 2009–13, and Lord Woolf, Law Lord, Master of the Rolls, 1996–2000 and Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2000–05 — Oral Evidence (QQ 30-42) ....................................................................... 159 Judicial Appointments Commission — Written evidence (OLC0020) .................................... 160 The Law Society of England and Wales — Written evidence (OLC0025) .............................. 162 Sir Thomas Legg KCB, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department, 1989-98 and Sir Alex Allan KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Constitutional Affairs then Ministry of Justice, 2004-07 — Oral Evidence (QQ 63-75) .................................................... 166 Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Chancellor 1987–97, and Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, 2000–05, Lord Chief Justice 2005–08, Senior Law Lord then President of the Supreme Court 2008–12 — Oral Evidence (QQ 16-29) ................................................... 167 Mr Colin Mardell — Written evidence (OLC0004) ................................................................. 178 Professor Michael Moss, Northumbria University, and Dr Clive Field, University of Birmingham — Written evidence (OLC0013) ......................................................................... 180 Mr Colin Murray, Newcastle Law School — Written evidence (OLC0021) ............................ 182 Dr Patrick O’Brien, Research Associate, University College London, Mr Graham Gee, lecturer, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, and Professor Andrew Le Sueur, Professor of Constitutional Justice, University of Essex — Oral Evidence (QQ 1-15) ............ 190 Dr Patrick O’Brien, University College London — Supplementary written evidence (OLC0012) ................................................................................................................................................ 191 Professor Dawn Oliver, University College London — Written evidence (OLC0001) ............ 193 Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, 2000–05, Lord Chief Justice 2005–08, Senior Law Lord then President of the Supreme Court 2008–12, and Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Chancellor 1987–97 — Oral Evidence (QQ 16-29) ....................................... 196 Sir Hayden Phillips, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department then Department of Constitutional Affairs, 1998-2004 — Written evidence (OLC0029) .............. 197 Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC, Attorney-General, 2007-10 and Rt Hon. Dominic Grieve QC MP, Attorney-General, 2010-14 — Oral Evidence (QQ 86-94) .............................................. 200 2 of 228 Rt Hon. Jack Straw MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, 2007-10 — Oral Evidence (QQ 95-105) ............................................................................................................ 201 Professor Andrew Le Sueur — Written evidence (OLC0005) ................................................ 208 Professor Andrew Le Sueur, Professor of Constitutional Justice, University of Essex, Mr Graham Gee, lecturer, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, and Dr Patrick O’Brien, Research Associate, University College London — Oral Evidence (QQ 1-15) .......... 224 The Lord Woolf — Written evidence (OLC0009) ................................................................... 225 Lord Woolf, Law Lord, Master of the Rolls, 1996–2000 and Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2000–05, Lord Hope of Craighead, Second Senior Law Lord then Deputy President of the Supreme Court, 2009–13, and Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, 2008–13 — Oral Evidence (QQ 30-42) ................................................................................... 228 3 of 228 Sir Alex Allan KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Constitutional Affairs then Ministry of Justice, 2004-07, and Sir Thomas Legg KCB, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department, 1989-98 — Oral Evidence (QQ 63-75) Sir Alex Allan KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Constitutional Affairs then Ministry of Justice, 2004-07, and Sir Thomas Legg KCB, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department, 1989-98 — Oral Evidence (QQ 63-75) Evidence Session No. 5 Heard in Public Questions 63 – 85 WEDNESDAY 22 OCTOBER 2014 Members present Lord Lang of Monkton (Chairman) Lord Brennan Lord Crickhowell Baroness Falkner of Margravine Lord Goldsmith Lord Powell of Bayswater Baroness Taylor of Bolton Baroness Wheatcroft ________________ Examination of Witnesses Sir Alex Allan KCB, Permanent Secretary, Department of Constitutional Affairs then Ministry of Justice, 2004-07, and Sir Thomas Legg KCB, Permanent Secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s Department, 1989-98 Q63 The Chairman: Welcome, gentlemen. We are very pleased to see two of you here today. We would have liked to have seen three, but unfortunately Sir Hayden Phillips is unwell. We thought we would get in touch with him after this session and give him an opportunity to comment on anything he felt he would like to say to us. We will probably send him a copy of the transcript of what has been said. I hope you will be content with that. You are aware that we are investigating the role and position of the Lord Chancellor, reviewing progress or otherwise since 2005. We are not in any way contemplating the personality of the present Lord Chancellor. It is a matter of the constitutional role and how it is evolving. We are
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Votes and Proceedings for 18 Jul 2019
    No. 333 Thursday 18 July 2019 Votes and Proceedings The House met at 9.30 am. Prayers 1 Questions to the Secretary of State for Transport 2 Business Question (Leader of the House) 3 Statement: Detention and rendition of detainees overseas (Mr David Lidington) 4 Select Committee Statement (Standing Order No. 22D) Publication of the Eighteenth Report of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee on Governance of Official Statistics: redefining the dual roles of the UK Statistics Authority; and re-evaluating the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 (Sir Bernard Jenkin) 5 Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill: Consideration of Lords Amendments Lords Amendment 1 Question proposed, That Amendment (a) to Lords Amendment 1 be made.—(Hilary Benn.) As it was one hour after the commencement of proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments, the Chair put the Questions necessary to bring proceedings on Lords Amendments 1 to 18 to a conclusion (Programme Order, 8 July). The following Questions were put forthwith (Standing Order No. 83F). (1) That Amendment (a) be made to Lords Amendment 1 (Question already proposed from the Chair). The House divided. Division No. 436 Ayes: 315 (Tellers: Thangam Debbonaire, Nic Dakin) Noes: 274 (Tellers: Mark Spencer, Jeremy Quin) Question accordingly agreed to. 2 Votes and Proceedings: 18 July 2019 No. 333 (2) That this House disagrees with the Lords in their Amendment 1 (as amended) (Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded).—(John Penrose.) The House divided. Division No. 437 Ayes: 273 (Tellers: Mark Spencer, Jeremy Quin) Noes: 315 (Tellers: Thangam Debbonaire, Nic Dakin) Question accordingly negatived.
    [Show full text]
  • What Lessons Can We Learn from the UK´S Next Steps Agencies Model? Foreword
    2001:23 What lessons can we learn from the UK´s next steps agencies model? Foreword This report is the work of Andrew Limb, on secondment from the Cabinet Office of the United Kingdom to Statskontoret during 2001. It serves to fill out the picture of how the executive agencies of the UK government are being governed. It answers a whole range of questions but in doing that unavoidably raises new ones. For the time being we have to stop our inquires here but may get the opportunity in the future to return to this issue. We have prepared this report in order to give perspectives and stimulate discussion on how the independent agencies of the central Swedish government are being governed. Anna Centerstig and Richard Murray have both helped in shaping the report. Lars Dahlberg 5 6 1. Background 9 What are the Next Steps Agencies ? 9 Origins of Next Steps Agencies 9 Historical context 10 2. Governance of Next Steps Agencies 13 Constitutional standing 13 Political governance 13 Forms of steering 14 Appropriation Process 16 Performance Management – target setting and monitoring 18 Governance documents 19 Rules and Regulations 21 3. Issues 23 General vs specific governance arrangements. 23 Systematic fundamental review. 24 Governance documents. 24 Advisory Boards 25 Key Ministerial Targets. 26 ANNEXES Annex A: List of Executive Agencies in the UK (July 2000) 29 What are Trading Funds? 35 Annex B: Other forms of governmental bodies 37 Annex C: The key features of quinquennial review 41 Quinquennial Review – Key Steps Flowchart 45 Value of Quinquennial
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to Home Secretary.Pdf
    62 Britton Street London EC1M 5UY United Kingdom Phone +44 (0)20 3422 4321 www.privacyinternational.org Rt Hon Sajid Javid MP Home Secretary Home Office 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Sent by email: [email protected] CC: Investigatory Powers Tribunal 25 September 2018 Dear Sajid Javid We are writing to express our grave concern and to request your urgent action following today's disclosures regarding the interception of data by the Security and Intelligence Agencies (SIA), including their alarming acquisition and retention of data relating to Privacy International and/or its employees. Privacy International (PI) is a registered charity based in London that works at the intersection of modern technologies and rights. Privacy International challenges overreaching state and corporate surveillance, so that people everywhere can have greater security and freedom through greater personal privacy. Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs et al. As you will be aware, in June 2015 PI commenced a challenge at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary and the SIA regarding the acquisition, use, retention, disclosure, storage and deletion of 'Bulk Personal Datasets' (BPDs) and Bulk Communications Data (BCDs). These databases and datasets contain vast amounts of personal data about individuals, the majority of whom are unlikely to be of intelligence interest. For example, BPDs held by the SIA include passport databases, travel data, and finance-related activity of individuals, while BCDs (the "who, when, where, and how" of both telephone and internet use) include location information and call data for everyone's mobile telephones in the UK for 1 year.
    [Show full text]
  • The Erosion of Parliamentary Government
    The Erosion of Parliamentary Government JOHN MAJOR CENTRE FOR POLICY STUDIES 57 Tufton Street London SW1P 3QL 2003 THE AUTHOR THE RT HON JOHN MAJOR CH was Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 1990 to 1997, having previously served as Foreign Secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was a Conservative Member of Parliament for Huntingdon from 1979 to 2001. Since leaving politics, he has returned to business in the private sector. He also lectures around the world and is active in many charities. The aim of the Centre for Policy Studies is to develop and promote policies that provide freedom and encouragement for individuals to pursue the aspirations they have for themselves and their families, within the security and obligations of a stable and law-abiding nation. The views expressed in our publications are, however, the sole responsibility of the authors. Contributions are chosen for their value in informing public debate and should not be taken as representing a corporate view of the CPS or of its Directors. The CPS values its independence and does not carry on activities with the intention of affecting public support for any registered political party or for candidates at election, or to influence voters in a referendum. ISBN No. 1 903219 62 0 Centre for Policy Studies, October 2003 Printed by The Chameleon Press, 5 – 25 Burr Road, London SW18 CONTENTS Prologue 1. The Decline of Democracy 1 2. The Decline of Parliament 3 3. The Politicisation of the Civil Service 9 4. The Manipulation of Government Information 12 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Solidarity Hypocracy in Perspective (1992)
    “ r *§ Jr “I- "\- L Va in ‘I'D %.h If-I I'f'lI* --. ...._. .:..a--- '--Ffiq-‘ 0 J '1' 1 ‘ _| in J\ "' 1}; *+1-ix?»012'-‘ill _, ... \ J I ,5: Q. tr‘ ._ ,-'l ‘ n '- ~1 -4- i gh --Qnni tiK. -.; '1 an-..,..~ M Iqfl ¢-,4 7'11 1 "1‘-I '-“an U 9 Q I -Ir" l'|‘ | 1. John Plckel 1cu-n-1| Miner (NUM) 4- l_-at 6 Months IV Q 1 "1- I SOILIHDARIITY HYIPUMCIRACY l=-&I==:s:='|r-I=l=__:c-:-..fi-|\/‘=5-_ ii —I_,-_ P -1 F-I i.'1‘Q, q 1?-?"":.;' ¢ Q: u ‘H! i-In =*"*i‘~\>~ ‘Q K Finqil’ ‘i ,<*' commaswwmmmwomas| ‘.1 '1'-'1 0“ "t vmummsmwumen ‘LifPi?‘,1 msxmanrmsownmv H-tifi-I MESOWEWESHUWEBNS4 nil! In ‘ fl1ECOVEHNkENTWSTNOIE -u IQII MOWEDIO PRIV/Uljf IOUR PRISONS! I J‘ I -_ ‘.3’ g a» W“.-.- n-.1: I ‘1--‘J c?'%3'**"",,,',-;- .. ‘I’ +1 1% X I‘ .s;r_ “ I u _‘91.‘l""“-“I';l"'‘Ir{'5" wi "3"-u. '\,-ROQ . v6 Q. —Iu-I——un-- ‘_ a%V@ Jcgjs 1992 $“5"-JA\(°‘ , 5% _.l-in|i__ - THE PRIVATISATION OF PRISONS — A STEP FORWARD OR BACKWARD IN THE STRUGGLE? . Many prisoners have welcomed the idea of privatisation. Not from the Tory government ‘market values are best’ perspective, but because they think that it will bring improvements in conditions and destroy the reign of terror of the Prison Officers’ Associa- tion (POA). The issue has been debated by prisoners and ex- prisoners in the pages of Fight Racism! Fight Imperialisml.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 Halsbury's Laws of England (3) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
    Page 1 Halsbury's Laws of England (3) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CROWN AND THE JUDICIARY 133. The monarch as the source of justice. The constitutional status of the judiciary is underpinned by its origins in the royal prerogative and its legal relationship with the Crown, dating from the medieval period when the prerogatives were exercised by the monarch personally. By virtue of the prerogative the monarch is the source and fountain of justice, and all jurisdiction is derived from her1. Hence, in legal contemplation, the Sovereign's Majesty is deemed always to be present in court2 and, by the terms of the coronation oath and by the maxims of the common law, as also by the ancient charters and statutes confirming the liberties of the subject, the monarch is bound to cause law and justice in mercy to be administered in all judgments3. This is, however, now a purely impersonal conception, for the monarch cannot personally execute any office relating to the administration of justice4 nor effect an arrest5. 1 Bac Abr, Prerogative, D1: see COURTS AND TRIBUNALS VOL 24 (2010) PARA 609. 2 1 Bl Com (14th Edn) 269. 3 As to the duty to cause law and justice to be executed see PARA 36 head (2). 4 2 Co Inst 187; 4 Co Inst 71; Prohibitions del Roy (1607) 12 Co Rep 63. James I is said to have endeavoured to revive the ancient practice of sitting in court, but was informed by the judges that he could not deliver an opinion: Prohibitions del Roy (1607) 12 Co Rep 63; see 3 Stephen's Commentaries (4th Edn) 357n.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rt Hon Sir Robert Neill MP Justice Committee Chair House of Commons London 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A OAA
    HM Treasury, 1 Horse Guards Road, London, SW1A 2HQ The Rt Hon Sir Robert Neill MP Justice Committee Chair House of Commons London 1 Horse Guards Road London SW1A OAA 5 May 2020 Dear Sir Robert, COVID-19 IMPACT ON LEGAL SECTOR 1. Thank you for your letter of 8 April highlighting the impact of the Covid-19 coronavirus outbreak on the legal professions. As the minister responsible for spending on the Justice system, I am responding on behalf of the Chancellor. 2. The government recognises the importance of the work of the legal professions in enabling access to justice across the country, and my officials are working closely with their counterparts in the Ministry of Justice and Legal Aid Agency to understand and mitigate the impact of Covid-19 on the sector. 3. In response to Covid-19, the government is making sure that people and businesses have access to the support they need as quickly as possible. We have announced unprecedented support for business and workers to protect them against the current economic emergency including an initial £330 billion of guarantees – equivalent to 15% of UK GDP. 4. The financial support schemes announced by the Chancellor should be accessible to firms in the legal sector who are experiencing reduced demand during this period. These are the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS), the Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CLBILS) and the Coronavirus Financing Facility (CFF). These schemes are designed to provide financial support to firms of all sizes facing cash-flow issues as a result of Covid-19.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bank Restriction Act and the Regime Shift to Paper Money, 1797-1821
    European Historical Economics Society EHES WORKING PAPERS IN ECONOMIC HISTORY | NO. 100 Danger to the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street? The Bank Restriction Act and the regime shift to paper money, 1797-1821 Patrick K. O’Brien Department of Economic History, London School of Economics Nuno Palma Department of History and Civilization, European University Institute Department of Economics, Econometrics, and Finance, University of Groningen JULY 2016 EHES Working Paper | No. 100 | July 2016 Danger to the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street? The Bank Restriction Act and the regime shift to paper money, 1797-1821* Patrick K. O’Brien Department of Economic History, London School of Economics Nuno Palma Department of History and Civilization, European University Institute Department of Economics, Econometrics, and Finance, University of Groningen Abstract The Bank Restriction Act of 1797 suspended the convertibility of the Bank of England's notes into gold. The current historical consensus is that the suspension was a result of the state's need to finance the war, France’s remonetization, a loss of confidence in the English country banks, and a run on the Bank of England’s reserves following a landing of French troops in Wales. We argue that while these factors help us understand the timing of the Restriction period, they cannot explain its success. We deploy new long-term data which leads us to a complementary explanation: the policy succeeded thanks to the reputation of the Bank of England, achieved through a century of prudential collaboration between the Bank and the Treasury. JEL classification: N13, N23, N43 Keywords: Bank of England, financial revolution, fiat money, money supply, monetary policy commitment, reputation, and time-consistency, regime shift, financial sector growth * We are grateful to Mark Dincecco, Rui Esteves, Alex Green, Marjolein 't Hart, Phillip Hoffman, Alejandra Irigoin, Richard Kleer, Kevin O’Rourke, Jaime Reis, Rebecca Simson, Albrecht Ritschl, Joan R.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Commons Official Report Parliamentary Debates
    Monday Volume 652 7 January 2019 No. 228 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday 7 January 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY THE RT HON. THERESA MAY, MP, JUNE 2017) PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY AND MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE—The Rt Hon. Theresa May, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER AND MINISTER FOR THE CABINET OFFICE—The Rt Hon. David Lidington, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. Sajid Javid, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS—The Rt. Hon Jeremy Hunt, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION—The Rt Hon. Stephen Barclay, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt Hon. Gavin Williamson, MP LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. David Gauke, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE—The Rt Hon. Matt Hancock, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY—The Rt Hon. Greg Clark, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Liam Fox, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Amber Rudd, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION—The Rt Hon. Damian Hinds, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENT,FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland: Toward a New Settlement? in This Issue
    | THE CONSTITUTION UNIT NEWSLETTER | ISSUE 38 | JANUARY 2008 | MONITOR SCOTLAND: TOWARD A NEW SETTLEMENT? IN THIS ISSUE The constitutional debate in Scotland in the SNP White Paper) with ideas on reconciling continues apace. In the last Monitor we more devolution with a renewal of the UK BRITISH BILL OF RIGHTS 2 reported on the SNP Government’s White union (which mark out a very different agenda). Paper Choosing Scotland’s Future – Especially notable were her ideas on risk-sharing A National Conversation. This set out options through fiscal solidarity across the UK, and those for Scotland’s constitutional future, ranging on guaranteeing rights of ‘social citizenship’ PARTY FUNDING REFORM 2 from further-reaching devolution to the SNP’s across the UK. Emphasising social rights across own preference of independence. jurisdictions suggests a concern to build common purposes – or, put another way, limits to policy EU REFORM TREATY 3 Beyond their commitment to ignore the SNP’s variation – to which risk-sharing and solidarity can ‘national conversation’, the other main parties be put to work in a UK-wide framework. in Scotland were generally silent on Scotland’s PARLIAMENT 3 constitutional options until a speech by the new This is a bold agenda. For it to work much would Labour leader in Scotland, Wendy Alexander, at depend on a willingness in Westminster and the University of Edinburgh on St Andrew’s Day, Whitehall to think creatively about rebalancing DEVOLUTION 5 30 November. This set out a unionist perspective the union. If devolution is to have a stronger on constitutional change; unlike the SNP White UK-wide context, then the devolved institutions Paper, independence was not an option.
    [Show full text]
  • British Overseas Territories Law
    British Overseas Territories Law Second Edition Ian Hendry and Susan Dickson HART PUBLISHING Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Kemp House , Chawley Park, Cumnor Hill, Oxford , OX2 9PH , UK HART PUBLISHING, the Hart/Stag logo, BLOOMSBURY and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in Great Britain 2018 First edition published in 2011 Copyright © Ian Hendry and Susan Dickson , 2018 Ian Hendry and Susan Dickson have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identifi ed as Authors of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. While every care has been taken to ensure the accuracy of this work, no responsibility for loss or damage occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any statement in it can be accepted by the authors, editors or publishers. All UK Government legislation and other public sector information used in the work is Crown Copyright © . All House of Lords and House of Commons information used in the work is Parliamentary Copyright © . This information is reused under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 ( http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/version/3 ) except where otherwise stated. All Eur-lex material used in the work is © European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ , 1998–2018. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
    [Show full text]
  • New Labour, Old Morality
    New Labour, Old Morality. In The IdeasThat Shaped Post-War Britain (1996), David Marquand suggests that a useful way of mapping the „ebbs and flows in the struggle for moral and intellectual hegemony in post-war Britain‟ is to see them as a dialectic not between Left and Right, nor between individualism and collectivism, but between hedonism and moralism which cuts across party boundaries. As Jeffrey Weeks puts it in his contribution to Blairism and the War of Persuasion (2004): „Whatever its progressive pretensions, the Labour Party has rarely been in the vanguard of sexual reform throughout its hundred-year history. Since its formation at the beginning of the twentieth century the Labour Party has always been an uneasy amalgam of the progressive intelligentsia and a largely morally conservative working class, especially as represented through the trade union movement‟ (68-9). In The Future of Socialism (1956) Anthony Crosland wrote that: 'in the blood of the socialist there should always run a trace of the anarchist and the libertarian, and not to much of the prig or the prude‟. And in 1959 Roy Jenkins, in his book The Labour Case, argued that 'there is a need for the state to do less to restrict personal freedom'. And indeed when Jenkins became Home Secretary in 1965 he put in a train a series of reforms which damned him in they eyes of Labour and Tory traditionalists as one of the chief architects of the 'permissive society': the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality, reform of the abortion and obscenity laws, the abolition of theatre censorship, making it slightly easier to get divorced.
    [Show full text]