To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking in response to the report of the Administrative Justice Steering Group, chaired by Lord Philip, Options for the Future Administration and Supervision of Tribunals in Scotland.
The Scottish Government participated in Lord Philip''s review, as part of the commitment given in the First Minister''s 30 January 2008 statement to Parliament, to look at the case for an integrated Tribunal Service for Scotland in order to meet the public service reform objective of [bringing] together organisations with similar skills, expertise and processes.
Tribunal reform has been prioritised by inclusion in the Programme for Government (3 September 2008), which said, we will identify ways to streamline and improve the operation of tribunals in Scotland, in light of the review being led by Lord Philip.
Independent research has been commissioned into tribunal training provision and judicial training needs, as referred to in the report, and the results will be published before the end of January 2009.
The immediate next steps are for three of the five options presented by Lord Philip, including the government''s preferred option of an integrated Tribunal Service for Scotland, to be evaluated in further detail, within the context of recommendations from Lord Gill''s forthcoming review of the civil courts, Lord Philip''s own further report into administrative justice and changes arising in Scotland from UK Government''s implementation of Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.
However, neither the status quo nor the option of UK-wide integrated service will be further considered. Lord Philip reports that the status quo does not provide good value to the taxpayer and is characterised by a duplication of effort. It is not fit for a modern purpose and is described correctly as an incoherent, inconsistent system arising from unplanned growth and comprising a confusing mix of devolved and reserved responsibilities.
Lord Philip has also effectively dismissed the case for a UK-wide integrated service, when he argues that integration of devolved Scottish tribunals within the UK system does not make sense, requiring aspects of the legal system in Scotland to be administered in England, concluding that this option would be inconsistent with the principle of devolution.
Policy responsibilities for Tribunals in Scotland are split between the UK and Scottish Governments but we agree with Lord Philip when he asserts that users are unlikely to be concerned with whether a tribunal is reserved or devolved, or by whom it is administered and concludes that there is a strong argument from the legal perspective for a new Scottish Tribunals Service to support both [reserved] GB tribunals within Scotland and [devolved] Scottish tribunals.
Exploratory discussions have already been held with the UK Government on the proper and effective administration of tribunals in Scotland, and these discussions will continue against the background of the national conversation on choosing Scotland''s future.