It
was announced on 21st January that the High Court has agreed
to hear an appeal for a judicial review about the decision
by the Deputy Prime Minister to agree that an accommodation
centre should go ahead at Bicester.
The Planning Inspector recommended that the application by the Home Office be
turned down. Instead the Deputy Prime Minister agreed that the application should
go ahead.
The judicial review is currently planned to announce its conclusions in March
2004, but it is not unlikely that this programme will slip.
Peter Viggers, Member of Parliament for Gosport, said today:
“
The application for an accommodation centre for asylum seekers at Bicester is
of course relevant to the proposal for an accommodation centre on the Daedalus
site at Lee-on-the-Solent. We are, therefore, taking a keen interest in the subject.
The Deputy Prime Minister must take decisions in this area on a quasi-judicial
basis and I therefore put down a Parliamentary Question on this subject in the
House of Commons in December 2003. I attach a copy of my Question and Answer.
I would maintain that the Deputy Prime Minister did not act in a quasi-judicial
capacity when dealing with the Bicester application and I anticipate that this
Question and Answer will help to illuminate the judicial review.
We are all following the subject very closely.”
4th December 2003
Quasi-Judicial
Decisions
Mr.
Viggers: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what
factors are taken into account when he takes a decision
in a quasi-judicial
capacity; and how these differ from the factors he takes
into account in decisions taken normally. [141925]
Keith
Hill: Quasi-judicial powers are administrative
powers which must be exercised in accordance with the
rules of natural
justice. In taking quasi-judicial decisions, my right
hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister must act and
be seen to
act fairly and even-handedly, by bringing an unbiased
and properly directed mind to his consideration of
the matter.
My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister must
take into account all relevant matters and not take into
account
irrelevant ones. These factors do not necessarily differ
from the factors to be taken into account in other
decisions but there may be a different degree of scrutiny
by the
courts. |
