House of Lords Journal 233 (Session 1999-00)
Minutes and Order Papers
Tuesday 4 April 2000
The House met at half-past two oclock.
The following Lords Spiritual and Temporal were present:
Irvine of Lairg, L.
Park of Monmouth, B.|
Patel of Blackburn, L.
Pearson of Rannoch, L.
Peyton of Yeovil, L.
Phillips of Sudbury, L.
Pilkington of Oxenford, L.
Platt of Writtle, B.
Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.
Porter of Luddenham, L.
Ramsay of Cartvale, B.
Randall of St. Budeaux, L.
Rendell of Babergh, B.
Renfrew of Kaimsthorn, L.
Renwick of Clifton, L.
Richardson of Calow, B.
Roberts of Conwy, L.
Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.
Rogers of Riverside, L.
Roll of Ipsden, L.
Ryder of Warsaw, B.
Ryder of Wensum, L.|
St. John of Bletso, L.
St. John of Fawsley, L.
Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.
Scotland of Asthal, B.
Sharp of Guildford, B.
Shaw of Northstead, L.
Sheppard of Liverpool, L.
Shore of Stepney, L.
Simon of Glaisdale, L.
Smith of Clifton, L.
Smith of Gilmorehill, B.
Smith of Leigh, L.
Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, L.
Stodart of Leaston, L.
Stoddart of Swindon, L.
Stone of Blackheath, L.
Symons of Vernham Dean, B.
Taylor of Blackburn, L.
Taylor of Warwick, L.|
Thomas of Gwydir, L.
Thomas of Walliswood, B.
Turner of Camden, B.
Wade of Chorlton, L.
Walker of Doncaster, L.
Wallace of Saltaire, L.
Walton of Detchant, L.
Warwick of Undercliffe, B.
Watson of Richmond, L.
Wedderburn of Charlton, L.
Williams of Elvel, L.
Williams of Mostyn, L.
Willoughby de Broke, L.
Woolmer of Leeds, L.
Wright of Richmond, L.
Young of Dartington, L.
PRAYERS were read by the Lord Bishop of Salisbury.
|1.||Regina v. Antoine (A.P.) (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))It was further ordered that the costs of the appellant be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Act 1988.|
|2.||Lubbe and others (Respondents) v. Cape Industries plc (Appellants) (England)The appeal of Cape plc was presented and it was ordered that in accordance with Standing Order VI the statement and appendix thereto be lodged on or before 16th May next.|
|3.||Horvath (A.P.) (Appellant) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.|
|4.||North Anderson Cars Limited (Appellants) v. Commissioners of Customs and Excise (Respondents) (Scotland)The appeal was set down for hearing and referred to an Appellate Committee.|
|5.||Lubbe (suing as administrator of the estate of Rachel Jacoba Lubbe) and others (Appellants) v. Cape plc (Respondents) and 10 other actions|
|6.||Lubbe and others (Respondents) v. Cape Industries plc (Appellants)|
The petition of the appellants praying that the appeals be consolidated, that they be allowed to lodge one statement, one case and one appendix and be jointly represented in respect of the two appeals and that the respondents have leave to lodge one case in respect of the two appeals (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed.
|7.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. British Telecommunications plc (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|8.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. Kelvin International Services Limited (formerly Kelvin Catering Limited) (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|9.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. London Bridge Engineering Limited (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|10.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. Norton (No.2) Limited (in liquidation) (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|11.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. Pickup No.7 Limited (formerly Northern Industrial & Marine Services Company Limited) (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|12.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. Stena Offshore Limited (Appellants) (Scotland)|
|13.||Caledonia North Sea Limited (Respondents) v. Wood Group Engineering Contractors Limited (Appellants) (Scotland)|
The petition of the appellants praying that the time for lodging the statement and appendix and setting down the cause for hearing might be extended to 15th May next (the agents for the respondents consenting thereto) was presented; and it was ordered as prayed (lodged 3rd April).
|14.||Appeal CommitteeThe 39th Report from the Appeal Committee was agreed to and the following Orders were made|
Chief Adjudication Officer (Respondent) v. Stafford and another (Petitioner)That the respondent be invited to lodge objections by 18th April next.
Warsame and another (Respondents) v. Mayor etc. of the London Borough of Hounslow (Petitioners)That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 18th April next.
Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department and another (Respondents) ex parte Mbanja (A.P.) (Petitioner)That leave to appeal be refused; that the costs of the petitioner be taxed in accordance with the Legal Aid Act 1988; and that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(c) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
Lister and others (A.P.) (Petitioners) v. Hesley Hall Limited (Respondents)That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 18th April next.
Regina v. Wandsworth County Court (Respondents) ex parte Saldanha (Petitioner)That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
Jarvis Interiors (Respondents) v. Galliard Homes Limited (Petitioners)That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
Hallam and another (Petitioners) v. Cheltenham Borough Council and others (Respondents)That the respondents be invited to lodge objections by 18th April next.
Coyle (Petitioner) v. Reid and another (Respondents) (Northern Ireland)That leave to appeal be refused; that the respondents be at liberty to apply for their costs in accordance with direction 5.1(d) and, if the application is granted, that the amount thereof be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments if not agreed between the parties.
|15.||Command PaperThe following paper was presented to the House by command of Her Majesty and ordered to lie on the Table:|
Competition CommissionReport on the proposed merger between News Communications & Media plc and Newsquest (Investments) Limited/Johnston Press plc/Trinity Mirror plc.
|16.||Negative InstrumentsThe following instruments were laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table:|
|1.||Supreme Court Fees (Amendment No. 2) Order 2000, laid under the Supreme Court Act 1981;|
|2. (i)||Civil Procedure (Modification of Enactments) Order 2000;||(941)|
|(ii)||Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2000;||(940)|
|laid under the Civil Procedure Act 1997;|
|3.||Draft Charities (Royal Medical Foundation of Epsom College) Order 2000, laid under the Charities Act 1993.|
|17.||Papers not subject to parliamentary proceedingsThe following papers were laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table:|
|1.||Statements of Guarantee given by the Secretary of State for Health on loans proposed to be raised by|
|(i)||North Tees and Hartlepool National Health Service Trust;|
|(ii)||Wiltshire and Swindon Healthcare National Health Service Trust;|
|(iii)||Avon and Western Wiltshire Mental Healthcare National Health Service Trust;|
|(iv)||Northallerton Health Services National Health Service Trust;|
|(v)||Leeds Teaching Hospitals National Health Service Trust;|
|(vi)||Lincolnshire Ambulance and Health Transport Service National Health Service Trust;|
|(vii)||Swindon and Marlborough National Health Service Trust;|
|(viii)||Norfolk and Norwich Health Care National Health Service Trust;|
|laid under the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990;|
|2.||County Court Fees (Amendment No. 2) Order 2000, laid under the County Courts Act 1984;|
|3.||Consent to Transfer of the Newspapers of News Communications & Media plc given, following a report from the Competition Commission, by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to|
|(i)||Newsquest (Investments) Limited;|
|(ii)||Trinity Mirror plc;|
|(iii)||Johnston Press plc;|
|laid under the Fair Trading Act 1973.|
|4.||Report of a call-out order to authorise the call-out of members of the Royal Fleet Reserve, the Royal Naval Reserve, the Royal Marines Reserve, the Army Reserve, the Territorial Army, the Royal Air Force Reserve and the Royal Auxiliary Air Force, laid under the Reserve Forces Act 1996.|
Select Committee Reports
|18.||Science and TechnologyThe 4th Report from the Select Committee, Non-Food Crops: Government Response, was made; it was ordered that the Report be printed. (HL Paper 54)|
|19.||Statutory InstrumentsThe 15th Report from the Joint Committee was made on certain statutory instruments, including the following affirmative instruments:|
|Draft Immigration (Leave to Enter and Remain) Order 2000;|
|Draft Youth Justice Board for England and Wales Order 2000;|
it was ordered that the Report be printed. (HL Paper 53)
|20.||Procedure of the HouseThe 2nd Report from the Select Committee was made (see appendix); it was ordered that the Report be printed. (HL Paper 55)|
|21.||Business of the HouseIt was moved by the Lord Carter, on behalf of the Baroness Jay of Paddington, that the debate on the motion in the name of the Lord Peyton of Yeovil set down for tomorrow shall be limited to 2 hours and that in the name of the Earl Peel set down for the same day to 3½ hours; the motion was agreed to.|
|22.||Care Standards Bill [HL]The bill was read a third time; amendments were moved and (by leave of the House) withdrawn; amendments were agreed to; a privilege amendment was agreed to; then the bill was passed and sent to the Commons.|
|23.||Insolvency Bill [HL]It was moved by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey that the bill be now read a second time; after debate, the motion was agreed to and the bill was committed to a Committee of the Whole House.|
|24.||Child povertyThe Baroness Crawley asked Her Majestys Government whether they are satisfied with the operation of the Sure Start programme with its aim of improving outcomes for disadvantaged children; after debate, the question was answered by the Baroness Hollis of Heigham.|
The House was adjourned at twelve minutes before nine oclock
till tomorrow, half-past two oclock.
Second Report from the Select Committee
on Procedure of the House
TUESDAY 4 APRIL 2000
By the Select Committee on Procedure of the House
Ordered to Report:
1. Revision of the Companion to the Standing Orders: appointment of sub-committee
The Committee appointed Lord Carter, Viscount Colville of Culross, Viscount Falkland and Lord Skelmersdale as the members of the sub-committee on revision of the Companion to the Standing Orders.
The Committee agreed that the Lord Chancellor should no longer read out The Queens Speech at the beginning of the resumed sitting after the State Opening of Parliament, but that instead the Speech should be printed in Hansard.
3. Procedure on consideration of Commons amendments
The Committee agreed a simplification of the procedure for considering Commons Amendments or Reasons. In future the Lord in charge of the bill should always move the initial motion (which is usually to agree with the Commons); and any motion to disagree should be tabled and moved as an amendment to the motion of the Lord in charge.
This would deal with all eventualities according to a standard procedure, similar to that with which the House is familiar for amendments at other stages of bills. It would apply to motions to disagree with Commons amendments, to insist on Lords amendments, and to make amendments in lieu or consequential amendments. It should replace the present complication of having different procedures for different circumstances, which sometimes leads to confusion.
4. Sub judice
The Committee agreed to a new sub judice resolution as follows:
Matters sub judice
|That, subject to the discretion of the Leader of the House, and to the right of the House to legislate on any matter or to discuss any delegated legislation, the House in all its proceedings (including proceedings of committees of the House) shall apply the following rules on matters sub judice:|
|(a) (i)||Criminal proceedings are active when a charge has been made or a summons to appear has been issued, or, in Scotland, a warrant to cite has been granted.|
|(ii)||Criminal proceedings cease to be active when they are concluded by verdict and sentence or discontinuance, or, in cases dealt with by courts martial, after the conclusion of the mandatory post-trial review.|
|(b)(i)||Civil proceedings are active when arrangements for the hearing, such as setting down a case for trial, have been made, until the proceedings are ended by judgment or discontinuance.|
|(ii)||Any application made in or for the purposes of any civil proceedings shall be treated as a distinct proceeding.|
|(c)||Appellate proceedings, whether criminal or civil, are active from the time when they are commenced by application for leave to appeal or by notice of appeal until ended by judgment or discontinuance.|
|But where a ministerial decision is in question, or in the opinion of the Leader of the House a case concerns issues of national importance such as the economy, public order or the essential services, reference to the issues or the case may be made in motions, debates or questions.|
|2.||Specific matters which the House has expressly referred to any judicial body for decision and report shall not be referred to in any motion, debate or question, from the time when the Resolution of the House is passed, until the report is laid before the House.|
|3.||For the purposes of this Resolution|
|(a)||Matters before Coroners Courts or Fatal Accident Inquiries shall be treated as matters within paragraph 1(a);|
|(b)||Question includes a supplementary question.|
The resolution was recommended by the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege because it is desirable that each House should be in the same position to debate a sub judice matter when the circumstances warrant it. The resolution adds to the discretion already exercised by the Leader of the House to allow discussion of matters which are sub judice in cases of ministerial decisions and issues of national importance. In being asked to exercise that discretion the Leader must be given at least 24 hours notice; and the exercise of the Leaders discretion may not be challenged in the House.1 These conditions should also apply to the wider discretion which the Committee now recommends should be conferred on the Leader.
1 Procedure, 1st Rpt 9495.