Parliament and the legislative Process : 14th report of session 2003-04, Vol. 2: Evidence

Recommends amendments to the Health and Social Care Bill to ensure that private (or voluntary) sector care homes which accommodate publicly-funded residents are brought within the scope of the Human Rights Act. House of Commons papers 303 2007-08.

Public Law: Text, Cases, and Materials offers a fresh approach to the study of constitutional and administrative law by exploring how the law works in practice.The inclusion of extracts from key cases, government reports and academic articles demonstrates the law in action and the incisive commentary that accompanies them explains the significance of each. The expert authors have distilled their knowledge of the institutions and legal principles intoconcise, focused prose, and they encourage reflection through regular questions and hypothetical examples.This leading text provides students with a thorough and wide-ranging knowledge of public law, together with a full understanding of the theoretical and political debates in this fascinating and dynamic area of law.Digital formats and resourcesThe fifth edition is available for students and institutions to purchase in a variety of formats, and is supported by online resources.- The e-book offers a mobile experience and convenient access along with functionality tools, navigation features and links that offer extra learning support: www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/ebooks- The online resources that support the book include multiple-choice questions with answer feedback for students to test their understanding

The report of the Leader's Group examining the working practices of the House of Lords and the operation of self-regulation was published today (Tuesday 26 April). Recommendations in the report include changes to enable the Lords better to fulfil its core functions of scrutinising government, testing out and reviewing legislation, and debating important issues. The report also suggests ways in which the House of Lords could make the most of its unique strengths and resources, including its Members' skills and experience.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights calls for a fundamental, independent review of the necessity for and proportionality of all counter-terrorism measures adopted since September 11 2001. It questions the way that the policy imperatives of national security and public safety have been used to justify squeezing out human rights considerations. Since September 11 2001, the Government has continuously claimed that there is a "public emergency threatening the life of the nation". The Committee questions whether the country has really been in this state for over eight years. A permanent state of emergency skews public debate about the justification for rights-limiting counter-terrorism measures. It is unacceptable that the Director General of the Security Service refuses to appear before it to give public evidence - despite giving public lectures and media interviews. The Committee finds the Government's narrow definition of complicity in torture significant and worrying and calls for an urgent independent inquiry into the allegations of complicity in torture. The Government should drop the draft bill still being held in reserve to allow pre-charge detention to be extended to 42 days. And more work should be done on measures - such as bail and the use of intercept evidence - that could reduce the use of pre-charge detention. The Intelligence and Security Committee should become a proper Parliamentary committee with an independent secretariat and legal advice and appointing an independent reviewer of counter-terror legislation who reports directly to Parliament not the Government.

The report The Implications For Access To Justice Of The Government's Proposals To Reform Legal Aid (HL100, HC 766) concludes that the government should reconsider its proposals for the reform of legal aid. The government has so far made welcome exemptions to its proposed residence test in the light of responses to its consultation, but the Committee is still not satisfied that the proposed test will not affect vulnerable groups. While accepting that it is legitimate for the government to introduce a residence test for civil legal aid and to restrict the scope of prison law funding, the Committee calls for more and broader exemptions from these proposals to avoid breaches of the fundamental right of effective access to justice in individual cases. The exceptional funding framework may not be working as intended and could therefore leave certain groups unable to access legal aid when human rights law requires it. The proposal to remove cases with

This report discusses the implementation of the right of disabled people to independent living in the context of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) which was ratified by the UK in 2009. It draws attention to a number of significant human rights issues, including: the need for freestanding legislation to protect the right to independent living in UK law; the effect of current reforms to benefits and services on the ability of disabled people to enjoy independent living; the role played by the UNCRPD in policy development and decision making at all levels of government; the use of equality impact assessments; the effects of devolution on implementation of the UNCRPD; and hate crime. The right to independent living does not exist as a freestanding right in UK law. Although it is protected and promoted to some extent by a matrix of rights, the Committee believes that this is not enough. It argues that the Government and other interested parties should immediately assess the need for, and feasibility of, legislation to establish independent living as a freestanding right. The Committee finds that reforms to benefits and services risk leaving disabled people without the support they need to live independently. It also finds that the Government had not conducted an assessment of the cumulative impact of current reforms on disabled people. This report urges them do so, and to report on the extent to which these reforms are enabling them and local authorities to comply with their obligations under the UNCRPD

The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) calls for statutory clarification of law on disclosure of national security-sensitive material, but finds no case for more extensive change. The Government has failed to make the case for extending "closed material procedures" to all civil proceedings and to inquests: the Government has not demonstrated that the fairness concern on which it relies to justify the proposal is in fact a real and practical problem. The Committee believes that closed material procedures are inherently unfair and the proposals in the Green Paper are a radical departure from longstanding traditions of open justice and fairness. Nor does it accept that replacing the current law governing disclosure of sensitive material (the law of Public Interest Immunity, or "PII") with closed material procedures is justified. The rule of law requires that decisions about the disclosure of material in legal proceedings be taken by judges not ministers and the current legal framework of PII has not been shown to be inadequate. There is a case, however, for that legal framework to be made clearer in the way in which it applies to national security-sensitive material and the Committee suggests how that could be done by legislation and changes to the Coroners Rules and guidance. The Committee regrets that the Green Paper overlooks the very considerable impact of its proposals on the freedom and ability of the media to report on matters of public interest and concern.

Government response to HL 5-I/HC64-I, session 2009-10 (ISBN 9780108459139)

Government response to HL 157/HC 318, session 2008-09 (ISBN 9780108458996)