UK Parliament / Open data

Welfare Reform Bill

The amendments are tabled in my name and that of the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, and were unanimously agreed by Members of the Constitution Committee, so are therefore Select Committee amendments. Amendments 174A, 174C and 174D relate to the recommendation in paragraph 10 of the report on the Bill, published on 23 April, that the commission should have to apply to the court for an order to disqualify a person from holding or obtaining a driving licence, travel authorisation, or both, rather than the commission being able to make the order. The amendments to the 1991 Act stipulate that the order-making powers are with the court, and accordingly, Section 39(1) of the 1991 Act would need little, if any amendment. The committee expressed concern that an unintended change to the constitution could occur whereby the Executive would acquire powers to impose sanctions and punishments on people in a way that is more properly exercised by the courts rather than civil servants. It is the view of the Select Committee that suspending a person’s right to hold a passport should be the responsibility of judges, not civil servants. Under the Bill’s provisions, a person disqualified by the commission from holding a passport would have a right to appeal to the court and, if such a right of appeal is exercised, the disqualification would be suspended while the appeal is determined. The clause begs two questions: first, whether the sanction power is one that the Executive rather than the court should exercise, and secondly, whether it is really a practical and cost-effective way in which to proceed. Your Lordships’ Select Committee, including those of us who have spent decades dealing with constituency cases concerning child maintenance—the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, has dealt with them in the courts—yields to nobody in its concern for those affected, and will require a convincing reply to questions about whether the provisions will improve or diminish the rights of those who are potentially affected. Amendment 174E reflects the committee’s further recommendations. The Bill gives the court the power to hear an appeal against the commission’s decision. If the amendments were accepted, the Bill would empower the courts to make both the original decision and hear any subsequent appeal. Amendment 174E addresses the committee’s other recommendations in paragraph 10 of the report. Section 111 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 already provides for appeals to the High Court that could be used in the context of the circumstances covered by the Bill. Amendment 174B addresses the recommendation in paragraph 11 of your Lordships’ committee’s report that if, contrary to the committee’s view, the commission is to be given administrative powers to remove people’s passports, that power should be exercised only by officials of appropriate seniority. Schedule 5 contains consequential amendments to Clause 42. Your Lordships’ Select Committee will propose amendments to Schedule 5 if and when it is appropriate during the further proceedings on the Bill. Amendment 174G is pursuant to your Lordships’ committee’s recommendation that if, contrary to our recommendations, the commission were to be given administrative powers to remove passports, the powers to make disqualification orders cannot be contracted out to private body or other people. If contrary to your Lordships’ committee’s recommendations and, I venture to think, that of your Lordships' House, administrative power is created for the commission to remove passports, it should be accompanied by an amendment to Section 8(1) of the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Act 2008 to exclude the imposition of sanction powers from those functions of the commission that may be contracted out. In the view of your Lordships’ Select Committee, it would not be constitutionally appropriate for a third party or private body to have decision-making power over who may not leave the United Kingdom. That is a matter for the courts. I beg to move.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
712 c137-8GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top