Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Plenary, 02 Mar 2000

02 Mar 2000 · S1 · Plenary

Item of business

European Convention on Human Rights

McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay Con Central Scotland Watch on SPTV

I am the first non-lawyer to speak. I do not get paid by the minute, so I will be brief.

As has been said, we support the Government's aim of protecting the rights of British citizens. Where we differ is in how we go about it. My colleagues will outline areas that have given us sufficient cause for concern to have initiated this morning's debate. I will concentrate on two areas that are of particular interest to me as a former justice of the peace and to my then colleagues.

Before coming to the Parliament, I served as a JP in North Lanarkshire. I took that honour seriously and such was my commitment that before local government reorganisation I was elected to my court area committee and thereafter to the North Lanarkshire justices committee. We formed a sub-committee to look at the on-going training needs of established and new justices, which I chaired. We had a good programme of training events for justices undergoing bench training, thanks in no small measure to the assistance of a first-class clerk of court. We were keen to maintain our high standard by organising training on new policing techniques and changes in the law.

We well knew then that the incorporation of the European convention on human rights would impinge on our practice even at the level of district courts. I strove to organise a series of training events, including a day on the theme of "Human Rights, Inhuman Wrongs"—a catchy title, I thought. Working on the trickle-down theory, we inquired about the training that was being undertaken by the Crown Office in anticipation of the change. The silence was deafening. Learning of that lack of preparation at the highest level, I feared the worst. Trouble loomed and we have not been disappointed—the warning was not heeded. Much of the bread-and-butter work of the district courts is in disarray. Some commentators might characterise events since the ECHR was incorporated as shambolic—I will not dwell on other descriptions.

The effect has been that 126 temporary sheriffs have been deemed illegal, thereby reducing the number of experienced sheriffs on whom those of us at the lower end of the scale can call for advice and input to training. Some 80 justices of the peace were removed from the court rota because they were ex officio, thereby increasing the difficulty of providing court cover in the district courts. Many good JPs have been cast aside—during my training, one of my supervisors was the SNP group leader in North Lanarkshire. Their removal puts pressure on the remaining JPs, none of whom does the work for the money, as the honour is unpaid.

I understand that in Edinburgh on Saturday the Minister for Justice addressed the District Courts Association conference on human rights. I am sorry that I missed his speech, but I had a surgery, and something that was happening in Ayr caught my attention as well.

Our motion calls for

"a statement on the Executive's state of preparedness for October".

I hope that that will be considerably better than the experience that I had in my former role. Perhaps the minister will be mindful of comments about statements being made in the public domain before being announced in Parliament and will tell us what he has in mind on reviewing the role of JP courts.

Briefly—I know that others will be interested in this—I want to cast our spotlight again on the children's hearing system. Recently I received a letter and explanatory booklet from the children's panel chairmen's group. I hope that the minister will address the concerns that have been expressed about the implications of the ECHR for that aspect of our highly respected and much envied system of dealing with juveniles. I look forward to hearing what he says.

Search Hansard contributions

Plenary, 02 Mar 2000

In the same item of business