Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

moved Amendment No. 238KA: 238KA: Schedule 15, page 217, line 17, leave out ““are”” and insert ““include”” The noble Baroness said: This group of amendments deals with points raised by the Council of Valuation Tribunal Members for England and Schedule 15 deals with the Valuation Tribunal for England. The schedule was the subject of some debate in the other place. Amendment No. 238KA seeks to leave out ““are”” and replace it with ““include””. This is the opposite of what we have previously sought. I am a little nervous that I may be told that ““are”” and ““include”” are synonymous. However, the council made the point that ““business arrangements”” dealt with in this part of the schedule are more extensive than just selecting members to hear an appeal. Amendment No. 238KB seeks to insert at line 7 on page 218 the words, "““with the consent of the President””." This concerns tribunals’ functions which, as the council points out, are by their nature judicial. The executive should not have the functions of the tribunal at its disposal without having to overcome that little hurdle. Amendment No. 279B seeks to amend Schedule 16, which refers to existing legislation. The relevant paragraph gives to the Valuation Tribunal Service the function of providing general advice about procedure in relation to proceedings before the tribunal. This might have been appropriate when trying to establish conformity between 56 different valuation tribunals, but for the future when there is a single tribunal with a judicially appointed president, it will not be appropriate. Advice on judicial procedure should normally come from a judicial, not an executive, source. As regards Amendment No. 279C, sub-paragraph (3)(a) provides for a majority of the members of the Valuation Tribunal Service board to be serving Valuation Tribunal presidents or chairmen. In the opinion of the majority of presidents of the present 56 tribunals, this provision blurs the separation of powers between judiciary and executive and has encouraged the Valuation Tribunal Service to involve itself in judicial matters. I am told that the service should follow the same form as HM Courts Service with one judicial member on the board to demonstrate clearly the division between judicial and administrative responsibilities. As regards Amendment No. 279D, as no tribunal member other than the president of a board is in issue, the relevant sub-paragraph is not required. I beg to move.