Scotland: Independence

Debate between Baroness Seccombe and Lord Wallace of Tankerness

Thursday 28th November 2013 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Seccombe]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the Scottish Government’s White Paper on Scottish Independence.

[The Advocate-General for Scotland (Lord Wallace of Tankerness) (LD)]

My Lords, the United Kingdom Government have been examining the content of this 670-page document since its publication on Tuesday. The reality is that if people in Scotland vote for independence Scotland’s future will need to be negotiated with the remaining United Kingdom, the European Union and others, with no certainty about the outcome. Although our detailed analysis continues, there is no evidence that the White Paper provides any clarity on addressing such key issues as currency, costings and pensions.

[Baroness Seccombe (Con)]

My Lords, I appreciate that my noble and learned friend may not have had time to assimilate the ramifications of the White Paper, but, as an ardent Conservative and unionist, I strongly believe that we are better together and worry about the effect that independence might have on this Westminster Parliament. The other place would lose 59 Members, but what would be the effect on this House? Would Scottish Peers, as foreign nationals, be able to retain their seats, and would, indeed, my noble and learned friend be here to answer Questions?

Justice: Personal Injury Cases

Debate between Baroness Seccombe and Lord Wallace of Tankerness

Tuesday 20th December 2011 Lords Chamber

[Lord Wallace of Tankerness]

My Lords, I am not aware that it has made any further pronouncements on the matter. However, the Government believe that a conditional fee arrangement backed by ATE insurance will ensure that the vast majority of clinical negligence claims will be able to be investigated and that the ATE insurance market will adapt to the new arrangements. It is also important to point out that in Clause 9 of the Bill there is an exceptional funding scheme, which may well be relevant in profoundly serious cases where clinical negligence arises. However, I am sure that my noble friend will make a contribution on these matters when this is debated, I hope next month.

[Baroness Seccombe]

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that people in minor accidents are sometimes encouraged to find that they have whiplash, which encourages a lawyer to say that they must be legally represented?

[Lord Wallace of Tankerness]

My Lords, I made the point earlier that there is little or no risk involved in many cases, but I also think—and this relates to my noble friend’s point—that some cases in which a claimant is funding their own legal costs may well never come to court, whereas if all their fees are paid for them it may be easier to pursue the claim.