Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Thomas of Gresford (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 27 February 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.


Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I totally disagree with the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, about not putting restrictions in the Bill. At Second Reading, I suggested that an ILEX qualification was the minimum that one would expect for DCWs who appeared in contested cases of any sort. I still think that that is the case. I also think it is very important that there be agreement on the standards to be employed by ILEX in looking at the way in which DCWs approach their job. I am unhappy that we have a letter of today’s date setting out these proposals. This Bill has been around for some eight or nine months and only today we have proposals thrust on us with no chance at all to consult on or discuss them with interested parties. As a result, I shall reserve the position of these Benches on whether it will be necessary to table further amendments to this clause on Report. I shall consider very carefully, with colleagues and interested parties, whether that will be appropriate. The Government have come some way towards what is necessary, but there has to be a point where non-qualified lawyers do not have rights of audience and I am not sure that the line is being properly drawn in the terms of the letter that we have now received.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c743-4 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Crime Courts Crown Prosecution Service Advocacy Legal profession Offenders Qualifications Powers Magistrates' courts Training
Legislation
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk