Westminster update: Law Society mental health amendment debated

Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill

Read our response to the new Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.

Our president Richard Atkinson welcomes the government's moves to repeal the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act and much of the Illegal Migration Act, which undermined the rule of law and access to justice.

Mental Health Bill: Law Society amendment debated

On Monday 27 January, Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green) moved an amendment suggested by the Law Society during committee stage proceedings for the Mental Health Bill.

Baroness Bennett’s amendment raised the issue of giving the Mental Health First-Tier Tribunal the power to overrule decisions of a nominated person and proposed to create additional safeguards in the event of pressure or coercion.

In response, Baroness Merron (representing the government) noted that she was grateful for the amendment and reassured the house that the bill enables the responsible clinician to overrule a nominated person on the grounds included in the amendment.

While this does not include judicial oversight, Baroness Merron argued it would be quicker and would avoid placing burdens on the Tribunal.

Baroness Berridge (Conservative) spoke on her amendments 77, 82 and 84 which seek to ensure that legal counsel would be accessible to anyone challenging the appointment of a nominated person through referring cases to the Mental Health Tribunal rather than the County Court.

Baroness Berridge noted that a County Court case to displace a nominated person involves means-tested legal aid, whereas the Mental Health Tribunal has Legal Services Commission funding which can therefore ensure more universal legal representation.

In response, Baroness Berron highlighted that the Tribunal is under considerable pressure and argued that adding further responsibility would create further delays in their existing processes.

Earl Howe (Conservative) raised his amendments 72 and 73 to improve safeguards for children against coercion and pressure.

He leant on the importance of the nomination process and the power of a nominated individual to express the need for further safeguards including publicly consulted codes of practice.

Baroness Berron agreed that there are legitimate concerns in the circumstances that Earl Howe raised and that the government has “to consider all the potential scenarios, which are very real challenges to us.”

The committee stage debate will continue in the coming days and peers will have an opportunity to put their amendments to a vote at report stage.

Justice question: MPs press for court backlog action

MPs used Justice Questions on Tuesday 28 January to press the government to address the courts backlog, set out a timeline for implementing its reviews into the justice system and do more to tackle domestic abusers misusing the family courts.

The shadow lord chancellor, Robert Jenrick, said the courts backlog is growing by 500 cases a month and asked if the lord chancellor was “content” rape trials are being scheduled into 2027.

Shabana Mahmood, the lord chancellor, pushed back firmly, calling the question “outrageous” and pointing to the Conservative record on the backlog when the party was in power six months ago.

She highlighted the additional court sitting days the Ministry of Justice has brought forward.

Andy Slaughter, the chair of the Justice Select Committee, raised the ongoing reviews into the Crown Court backlog and sentencing, asking what the timeframe would be for action.

Mahmood acknowledged the pace would depend on the findings of both reviews, but said the government wants to work quickly, while noting there will likely be legislative change required for court reform.

Finally, Labour MP Alistair Strathern asked the government to review the presumption of parental contact that forces many victims of domestic abuse to go through family court proceedings to keep children away from abusers.

Sarah Sackman agreed that the family courts should never be used to retraumatise victims and said the government is reviewing parental contact in these situations.

Business and Trade Committee kicks off inquiry into export led growth

On 21 January, the Business and Trade Committee launched a new inquiry programme into export-led growth.

Chair Liam Byrne (Labour) kicked off the series of evidence sessions by questioning the trade minister, Douglas Alexander, and the minister for EU relations, Nick Thomas-Symonds.

The session focused on the trade policy of the new government, scrutinising its plans for the future trading relationship with the EU.

Members asked Alexander about the government’s target for achieving the fastest growing economy in the G7 and the role of trade in this ambition.

The minister acknowledged the significant challenges and emphasised the importance of a clear trade strategy, which is set to be published later in the spring.

The chair asked Thomas-Symonds about the reset with the EU and its importance.

The minister described the three pillars of the reset – security, safety and trade – and emphasised the need for structured cooperation with the EU.

Matt Western (Labour) inquired about the potential barriers identified in the reset conversations.

The minister emphasised the constructive nature of the discussions and the democratic mandate for the reset.

Rosie Wrighting (Labour) asked about the priority sectors for discussion around the mutual recognition of professional qualifications.

Alexander mentioned the focus on regulated professions and the challenges faced in securing recognition.

He added that the government is keen to pursue mutual recognition of professional qualifications and highlighted the importance of regulated professions in this context.

EU Youth Mobility Scheme raised in both chambers

The potential for a youth mobility scheme with the EU was on the agenda in both Houses on Wednesday and Thursday this week.

In the Commons, Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the Cabinet Office Sarah Olney led a Westminster Hall debate while in the Lords a motion was put forward by the Bishop of St Albans.

Olney built on the private members bill tabled by her Liberal Democrat colleague last week, noting that providing opportunities to young people should be at the heart of government policy.

She stressed that “the Liberal Democrats believe that establishing a youth mobility scheme would offer not only huge benefits to young people, but a broader range of benefits, including strengthening cultural, social and economic links between the EU and the UK.”

The minister for EU Relations, Nick Thomas-Symonds, responded for the government, highlighting meetings between the prime minister and the president of the European Commission, as well as between the foreign secretary and Maroš Šefčovič, the EU trade commissioner.

Over in the Lords, the Bishop of St Albans raised his support for reintroducing youth mobility and cultural exchanges, pointing to the benefits for our foreign policy and the sheer demand for the restoration of these opportunities for our young people and the broader public.

The motion was supported by peers from all parties, with many of them noting that it was important to be clear that youth mobility schemes are not equivalent to freedom of movement.

It was felt that the request for a scheme should come from the UK, with Lord Watson (Labour) highlighting a readiness for negotiation from the EU side.

He flagged that Maroš Šefčovič had said recently that a pan-European customs area “is something we could consider”.

Baroness Twycross responded to the debate on behalf of the government and gave an update on the UK-EU reset.

She noted that the government has agreed to hold regular UK-EU summits at leader level to review progress, starting in the first half of this year.

She also mentioned the need to consult with business on their plans, highlighting the UK-EU Domestic Advisory Group, of which the Law Society is a member.

She closed the debate repeating the government’s line that “with regard to a prospective scheme with the EU, the government have been clear that we do not have any plans for a youth mobility scheme, but we will look at the EU’s proposals on a range of issues.”

Coming up

We are working closely with MPs and peers to influence a number of bills before parliament:

• Arbitration Bill will begin its committee stage in the Commons on 11 February
• Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will have its second reading in the Commons on 10 February
• Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill began its committee stage in the Commons on 21 January
• Data (Access and Use) Bill will have its third reading in the Lords on 5 February
• Employment Rights Bill will have its report stage in the Commons, date to be confirmed
• Mental Health Bill began its committee stage in the Lords on 14 January
• Product Regulation and Metrology Bill will begin its report stage in the Lords on 26 February
• Renters Rights Bill will have its second reading in the Lords on 4 February
• Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill began its committee stage in the Commons on 28 January