Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Justice Committee 10 June 2014

10 Jun 2014 · S4 · Justice Committee

Item of business

Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

MacAskill, Kenny SNP Edinburgh Eastern Watch on SPTV

Amendments 22 and 35, which are in the name of Liam McArthur, supported by Tavish Scott, would omit section 26, which abolishes the office of honorary sheriff, and would retain the ability of sheriffs principal to appoint honorary sheriffs. Amendments 36 and 37, which are also in the name of Liam McArthur, supported by Tavish Scott, seek to make the commencement of section 26 subject to the affirmative procedure. The Government recognises the contribution that honorary sheriffs have made to the justice system in rural, remote and island areas, particularly in view of the fact that the position is unpaid. I readily appreciate the role that honorary sheriffs have played in Orkney and Shetland over the years. Honorary sheriffs perform urgent shrieval functions, such as custody court functions, in the absence or possible illness of the resident sheriff. Currently, honorary sheriffs have the same powers and competence as a full sheriff, even though there is no necessity for them to be legally qualified. Many are former sheriffs or solicitors, but some are not. The policy of the bill is to abolish the position of honorary sheriffs. The use of honorary sheriffs was criticised in some consultation responses, and some stakeholders, including Scottish Women’s Aid, supported their abolition. It is considered that the need for honorary sheriffs will reduce and then disappear completely due to the advent of the new summary sheriffs and as a result of the greater use of technology such as videolinks to remote locations. I understand that some business in Stornoway is already being dealt with in Inverness via videolink. It is also desirable that Scotland should have a fully professional, legally qualified judiciary. Lord Gill gave evidence to the committee that “The honorary sheriffs have fulfilled a need, particularly in outlying courts, but in a modern judicial system, all judicial work should wherever possible be done by professionally qualified and properly trained sheriffs.” He went on to say: “However, there is value to be had from the services of honoraries in the outlying courts. I imagine that, over time, the need for those services will steadily diminish because, with the increased flexibility that we will have through the use of summary sheriffs, and the ability to deploy summary sheriffs over a wide area and between courts, the need to bring in honoraries at weekends, for example, should be so much less.”—Official Report, Justice Committee, 22 April 2014; c 4533. Abolition will be delayed until alternative judicial arrangements are put in place. That may take some time, as it is envisaged that summary sheriffs will be introduced gradually. However, it should be possible to extend videolinks to a greater number of remote and rural courts more quickly. Amendments 36 and 37 would make the commencement of section 26 subject to affirmative procedure in the Parliament. Commencement orders are not normally subject to any parliamentary procedure and such a provision would be unusual. I appreciate that the reasoning behind amendments 36 and 37 is to give Parliament an opportunity to consider whether alternative judicial arrangements have been made and whether appropriate technology has been installed. The Government will work closely with the Scottish Court Service and the Lord President to ensure that we are content that the appropriate alternative arrangements are in place before the office of honorary sheriff is abolished. Therefore, amendments 36 and 37 are unnecessary. I ask Alison McInnes to withdraw amendment 22 and not to move amendments 36 and 37, given the assurance that I have given that the changes will be made over time and that alternative arrangements are also being made.

Search Hansard contributions

Justice Committee 10 June 2014

In the same item of business