Am I right in thinking that Tony Blair didn't actually appoint his mates to be judges on the Supreme Court (as GF states on this, and later, on another thread) but the Law Lords from the previous set-up became the new judges in the 2009 Supreme Court?
And what is Tony Blair's influence on the current set-up, particularly as half the judges were appointed 2017 or later?
In fact - how much influence does any PM have in the selection of the Judges? The Lord Chancellor (who, as a cabinet minister, may actually speak for the PM) recommends new appointees to the PM who reports those names to the Queen, The LC doesn't select the new judges though. The selection commission puts forward names to the LC who can veto twice but has to accept the third name or pick one of the two original names. I'm guessing that the selection commission is a politically neutral body and, in that case, the Government of the day, and certainly the PM of 10 years ago, would have little say in the make up of the current Supreme Court.
(all courtesy of Google - apologies if this offends anybody
)
Originally Posted by wrinkly
Am I right in thinking that Tony Blair didn't actually appoint his mates to be judges on the Supreme Court (as GF states on this, and later, on another thread) but the Law Lords from the previous set-up became the new judges in the 2009 Supreme Court?
Hall Of Fame
Reply With Quote
