House of Commons Hansard Debates for 19 Oct 1992

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

Stipends

21. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, how much income the Church Commissioners expect from parish and diocesan contributions for stipends during the current financial year ; and if he will make a statement.

Column 198

Mr. Michael Alison (Second Church Estates Commissioner, representing the Church Commissioners) : We expect that parishes will raise about £65 million towards stipends this year. This represents just over 40 per cent. of their total cost.

Mr. Greenway : Will my right hon. Friend accept that we must not become involved in the law of diminishing returns on the number of clergy to do the job and that the Church will die in that sense if we do? Will he ensure that sufficient money is raised by one means or another to pay enough clergy to do the job? Has he read yesterday's sermon by one of his constituents, the Archbishop of York? What view does he take of that?

Mr. Alison : That was a somewhat double-barrelled supplementary question--perhaps I should address the second barrel of it. The Archbishop of York is a constituent and friend of mine, but that does not mean that I have to agree with everything that he says. The doctrine of the infallibility of bishops and archbishops is not a doctrine of the Church of England. Perhaps I should put the corollary more positively : the doctrine of the fallibility of bishops and archbishops is a doctrine of the Church of England.

Mr. Frank Field : To what extent has the problem been exacerbated by the commissioners' borrowing and buying into the property market just before it collapsed?

Mr. Alison : The hon. Gentleman will know that, apart from dividends and rents, the commissioners have no source of income other than borrowing. The collapse of the property market has hit the Church Commissioners extremely hard, like many other investors, but the hon. Gentleman will recall that when the stock exchange market collapsed in 1987 the Church beneficiaries were entirely unaffected because there was much investment in property.

Set-aside

22. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, how much income will be derived by the commissioners from the common agricultural policy set-aside scheme in the current financial year.

Mr. Alison : The commissioners do not, as a matter of policy, farm any land themselves. Any set-aside payments will be made to their tenants.

Mr. Banks : At a time when pits are facing closure because they are said to be uneconomic, is it not wrong for any land that is owned by the Church to be attracting money when nothing is grown on it? The right hon. Gentleman knows far more about this than I do, but did not St. Paul say something about a man reaping what he sows? I can see exactly what is being reaped by some tenants--a lot of payments from the taxpayer. I cannot see what the tenants are sowing, other than discontent.

Mr. Alison : The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, paradoxically, much contentment will accrue for a large number of urban dwellers who have strong ecological and environmental sympathies. They will find that, instead of cornfields, there will be many acres of beautiful flowing grass and lovely cornflowers growing. That will be widely appreciated by a large number of people.

Column 199

Parsons' Freehold

23. Mr. John Marshall : To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, what assessment he has made of the financial consequences of the abolition of the parsons' freehold.

Mr. Alison : The financial consequences of any changes to the existing system of freehold will depend on the nature of those changes. A General Synod steering group on clergy terms and conditions of service is examining freehold, among other matters, and the commissioners stand ready to help to assess any financial aspects as and when that group's work is more advanced.

Mr. Marshall : Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the parsons' freehold and the absence of women priests act as a barrier to effective ministry?

Mr. Alison : My hon. Friend will appreciate that the parsons' freehold is not now an unconditional reality. Parsons who secured livings after 1975--which accounts for the overwhelming majority--are obliged to lose their freehold at the age of 70, so there is already a severe diminution in the absolute reality of the parsons' freehold. Whether or not it will be further reduced remains to be seen when the Synod reaches its conclusion.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

Immigration

26. Mr. Madden : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department in how many cases since June, to date, the Home Office has applied to adjourn immigration appeal and immigration appeal tribunals to enable applications from spouses with children with a right of abode in the United Kingdom to be reviewed.

The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. John M. Taylor) : In the period June to 14 October, the Home Office applied for adjournments in the type of case to which the hon. Member refers on 249 occasions before immigration adjudicators and on 11 occasions before the immigration appeal tribunal.

Mr. Madden : Although I accept that the reuniting of limited numbers of families separated under the primary purpose rule is welcome, does not the hon. Gentleman accept that that rule remains manifestly unfair and unjust? Will he urge Home Office Ministers to abolish it immediately, and warn them that it would be wholly unacceptable for them to replace the primary purpose rule by extending to four years the probationary period before which a spouse can apply for permanent settlement? That action would result in a storm of protest.

Mr. Taylor : The state of the law is entirely a matter for the Home Office, and it is not my place to give it guidance.

Mr. Dickens : Does my hon. Friend agree that entry to the United Kingdom must be controlled in a strict but fair manner? Every illegal immigrant who enters the United Kingdom takes up a job or receives benefits that we cannot afford. If I had a pound for every illegal immigrant in this country I would be a very rich man, and there would be plenty of jobs for everyone.

Column 200

Mr. Taylor : As ever, my hon. Friend expresses himself more vividly and powerfully than I can, and I completely agree with certain of his remarks.

Mr. Boateng : Is not the Minister well aware that in this matter--as in housing, welfare and employment law--the law centres movement makes a valuable contribution to the cost-effective provision of legal services? The Minister knows that those services are under threat from local authority cuts throughout the country. Will his Department do something to prevent the disruption of legal services, or are we to see only more hand- wringing and head-scratching from this wretched Government?

Mr. Taylor : I do not think that I am in either the hand-wringing or the head-scratching business--but I am in the business of welcoming the hon. Gentleman to the Opposition Front Bench. He brings to his job considerable knowledge of his subject and, in particular, of law centres.

I know that the Lord Chancellor is personally sympathetic towards law centres. Part of the difficulty is that they are often so beset with local disputation that it is hard for an external agency to contribute constructively.

Welsh Language

27. Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what steps are being taken to promote the use of the Welsh language in civil and criminal courts in Wales.

Mr. John M. Taylor : Section 1 of the Welsh Language Act 1967 makes provision for the Welsh language to be spoken in any legal proceedings in Wales. My Department is committed to providing a responsive service to Welsh-speaking members of the community and is shortly to issue a policy statement that will set out the way in which that will be achieved.

Mr. Jones : The Parliamentary Secretary will be aware that, very shortly, a new Welsh language Bill will be before the House. Can he confirm --

Several Hon. Members rose--

Madam Speaker : Order. Will the hon. Members who are standing please sit down?

Mr. Jones : Will the Bill contain a provision for hearings to be conducted through the medium of the Welsh language, either by defendants in criminal trials or by litigants in civil trials? If so, will sufficient resources be allocated to enable court staff to be trained in the use of Welsh in courts?

Mr. Taylor : The Welsh Language Act 1967 and the Welsh Courts Act 1942 provide Welsh speakers with safeguards. I do not think that I should comment on legislation that has not yet been introduced in the House, but the hon. Gentleman will at least concede this much to me : although I am an Englishman, I spent four years as the Government's Welsh Whip, and I always wish to be helpful in regard to Welsh affairs.

Juries

28. Mr. Cohen : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what information he keeps on the racial composition of juries.

Column 201

Mr. John M. Taylor : My Department does not routinely keep records on the racial composition of juries ; however, a limited research exercise was carried out at a number of Crown court centres in November 1990, when jurors' race was recorded from observation.

Mr. Cohen : Have not the Society of Black Lawyers and the Commission for Racial Equality spoken in favour of multiracial juries? According to the CRE,

"An all-white jury may have no members capable of challenging prejudice."

Are not the lists of juries predominantly "white male"? [Interruption.] Why will the Government not make a simple change, enabling a multiracial or a mixed-sex jury to be convened if either the defence or the prosecution requests it?

Mr. Taylor : I hope that the hon. Gentleman will forgive me. I did not hear all of his question, but I shall do my best to reply. [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. It really is very disruptive if Front Benchers cannot hear the questions that they are asked. I hope that the House will now settle down and listen to the Parliamentary Secretary's reply.

Mr. Taylor : During the informal observation of jury composition, the Society of Black Lawyers was consulted by the Lord Chancellor, and that was very much the intention. Meanwhile, the law on jury selection is a matter for the Home Office. Jury composition in practice is based on random selection, but the hon. Member may be pleased to know that the royal commission is examining the ethnic composition of juries as part of its remit.

Legal Aid

29. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department whether he will consider introducing improvements to the legal aid system ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. John M. Taylor : The legal aid scheme is kept under constant review to ensure that it is operating as effeciently and effectively as possible.

Mr. Skinner : Is there not something seriously wrong with the allocation of legal aid when a miner receiving redundancy pay is not allowed such aid to enable him to sue British Coal for stealing £735 million from the pension fund, but, as I read the other day, the Maxwell brothers, who have been charged with stealing the Mirror pension funds, have been granted it? Where is the classless society represented in such double standards?

Mr. Taylor : I thought that the hon. Gentleman would ask that question.

Mr. Skinner : Go on, then. Answer it.

Mr. Taylor : I cannot comment on individual cases. The grant of legal aid in civil cases is dependent on whether there will be any benefits gained from litigation. In criminal cases, the test is the means of the applicant and the interests of justice. Either the Legal Aid Board or the court independently assesses these cases. If people are aggrieved by someone having been granted legal aid, they can object--and that includes the hon. Gentleman.

Sir Ivan Lawrence : As two of the problems concerning civil legal aid are, first, that it requires the Government to

Column 202

sign a blank cheque and, secondly, that it excludes a large number of people from access to the courts, will my hon. Friend give serious consideration to encouraging private legal aid insurance, which would relieve both those problems?

Mr. Taylor : I thank my hon. and learned Friend for his question. There is a role for legal expenses insurance. I think that it is to be pursued. My hon. and learned Friend may have a valuable role to play. We also have progress to make in respect of conditional fees for which the courts and legal services legislation expressly paved the way.

30. Mr. Steen : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to review the working of the legal aid fund.

Mr. John M. Taylor : The working of the legal aid fund is kept under constant review.

Mr. Steen : Is the Minister aware that in each of my surgeries an increasing number of wives and young children are being-- [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. We are still in Question Time and the hon. Member for South Hams (Mr. Steen) has the Floor.

Mr. Steen : Is the Minister aware that in each of my-- [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. Mr. Steen--third time lucky.

Mr. Steen : Is the Minister aware that in each of my surgeries in the last year an increasing number of wives with young children have told me that they have been abandoned by their husbands, leaving the state to pick up the tab? Will the Minister find a way of ensuring that husbands who abandon their wives and young children do not receive legal aid and that wives who need legal aid obtain it so that they can pursue their husbands and get the money for their children and for themselves?

Mr. Taylor : Any marriage breakdown--it is always a tragedy--is especially a tragedy for the children. Whatever the rights and wrongs of legal assistance may be in the case of the parting parents, the Lord Chancellor's Department would wish there to be a legal aid system for matrimonial affairs that looks after the interests of the children, which are absolutely paramount.

Mr. Cryer : Is not the legal aid system designed to help people on low incomes? Will not a system of flat fees for legal aid inevitably work against very poor people, who will be deprived of proper legal representation, particularly in lengthy or complicated cases? Will the Minister reject entirely today in Parliament the concept of flat fees?

Mr. Taylor : I will not in any way forswear the concept of standard fees, which are a good idea. Standard fees tend to reward proficiency. The only consequence of legal aid as it is at the moment is that the bloke who takes longest gets paid most. That does not seem to be very satisfactory.

Divorce Law Reform

31. Mr. Wicks : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement concerning his plans for divorce law reform.

Column 203

Mr. John M. Taylor : I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's expertise in social and family policy. The Lord Chancellor is considering reform of divorce law as part of the rolling programme of family law and business. To oversee this programme, the family law and administration working party was established in 1989. There are also the proposals of the Law Commission entitled, "The Grounds for Divorce."

Mr. Wicks : I note the House's considerable interest in this question. Does the Minister agree that, as every year the parents of 150,000 children under 16 divorce, the time for inaction by his Department has long since passed?

Mr. Taylor : I agree ; but it is extremely important, in a subject about which people hold strong, sincere and deep views, that we get the question of reforming the divorce law right rather than simply achieve speed. It is inevitable that, during the discussions, there will be a great deal of deliberation about mediation, particularly if we are to depart from the traditional adversarial role in divorce matters and from the concept of fault and blame.

Column 204

Courts (Public Confidence)

32. Mr. Bennett : To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to improve public confidence in the courts.

Mr. John M. Taylor : I refer the hon. Member to the statement made by the Lord Chancellor in another place and by the Home Secretary in the House on 14 March 1991, announcing the establishment of the Royal Commission on criminal justice.

Mr. Bennett : Will the Minister explain why the Government set up the May inquiry and then decided to abandon it when it appeared to be coming up with a report critical of senior judges? If we are to restore the reputation of courts, it is important that such an inquiry is completed and that criticism of judges is published.

Mr. Taylor : The vast majority of criminal cases are dealt with in a perfectly satisfactory way. There have, however, been very proper anxieties expressed about some cases that have led to convictions being quashed. That is why the royal commission was set up, and it is not for me to anticipate its findings.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page