Judges on £172,000 salaries ‘should be paid more’
Lord Hamilton: For quite a few years weve not kept up with inflation. Picture: Andrew Milliagan/PA Wire
SCOTLAND’S most senior judge has warned that falling pay has left the bench struggling to attract the “best people” from the legal profession to fill vacancies.
The High Court in Scotland is now operating one judge short, Lord Hamilton told MSPs yesterday, after a recent round of recruitment failed to produce any suitable candidates.
High Court judges take home a salary of about £172,000, with the Lord President himself earning £214,000. This compares with Prime Minister David Cameron’s pay of about £142,000 and First Minister Alex Salmond’s £135,000.
But the public-sector pay freeze means judges now make less than they did “five or seven years ago” in real terms, Lord Hamilton told Holyrood’s justice committee yesterday.
His remarks met with little sympathy last night from opposition MSPs, who said most ordinary workers could “only dream” of the six-figure salaries paid to judges.
Lord Hamilton, who as Lord President and Lord Justice General of Scotland, is head of the judiciary, said the public spending freeze had taken its toll on judicial salaries.
He said: “That gives rise to a number of problems, not least of which is how do we ensure that we encourage the best people qualified for the post to apply to be senators of the College of Justice.
“One of the problems that we had last year was that there was a competition. But the board, having interviewed a number persons, found that none of those who applied were suitable for appointment. So we’ve been in a situation where we have been running one judge short for the last year or so.
“That’s a matter of real concern.”
High Court judges in Scotland hear the most serious criminal cases, including murder, rape and serious assaults. They are recruited as senators of the College of Justice and can also sit in the Court of Session, the top civil court.
Judicial pay is set by the government at Westminster, but repeated calls from the Judicial Senior Salaries Review Board to increase pay in recent years have been ignored by UK ministers.
There are also “real concerns” about changes being made to judicial pensions. Lord Hamilton said, to address the wider problems with public-sector pensions.
But Labour MSP Drew Smith said last night: “Of course we need talented people to become judges, but it’s hard to believe that a salary greater than the Prime Minister’s is not attractive.
“Most people could only dream of a £172,000 salary, with a generous pension too,” he added.
“If low-paid public-sector workers are facing a pay freeze, it would be grossly unfair to give High Court judges an exemption.”
Conservative justice spokesman John Lamont called for urgent action to address the issue.
“Lord Hamilton’s statement gave a deeply concerning insight into the quality of judges being attracted to work in the Scottish justice system,” Mr Lamont said.
“We must always maintain the highest standards in our courts, and if the current pay freeze is leading to a lack of qualified judges, then something must change.
“It is unacceptable that current judges are being stretched thin to cover for the shortage, and immediate steps must be taken to hire an experienced and aptly qualified judge as soon as possible.
“The SNP have to urgently start investing in our justice system, or otherwise risk seeing a dramatic fall in standards.”
High Court judges in Scotland are almost exclusively recruited from the Faculty of Advocates, which is made up of the country’s most senior lawyers. Candidates for the bench are usually QCs, which means they will have about 20 years of experience as an advocate and are usually in their mid-to late fifties.
Some top criminal advocates can expect to make up to £250,000 a year, while in commercial law it can be double this or more. But advocates don’t receive salaries and only make money if they generate work. They are not eligible for public-sector pension available to judges.
Retired judges and temporary judges, who are usually senior advocates or sheriffs, are sometimes drafted in to help out in the High Court during busy periods in an effort to ensure cases are dealt with in a timely fashion.
Lord Hamilton said: “We are conscious, as everyone is, that there are restraints which apply to everybody, and we have to take our responsibility in that regard.
“But it should be borne in mind that for quite a few years now we’ve not kept up with inflation.”
Christine Grahame, who convenes the justice committee, said: “You have that on the record, Lord President, but I’m not sure how sympathetic the public will be.”
A report last year found Scottish judges are paid eight-and-a-half times the country’s average salary, the highest ratio of its kind in Europe.
The most senior members of the nation’s judiciary collect an average of £187,265 each, according to a study of European justice systems.
That makes them among the best-paid lawmen and women on the continent and leaves their wages more out of kilter with average incomes than anywhere else.
The finding was one of several highly controversial revelations from the Council of Europe, the body that oversees the work of the European Court of Human Rights.
Judges in Switzerland and Ireland were paid more than their Scottish equivalents, the study found, but nowhere was the gulf in wages higher between judges and the rest of the country.
Lord Hamilton said yesterday: “There are things on the horizon which might lead to a smaller judicial pay budget required, but it’s still important that we should get the right people in the right jobs.”
About 40 per cent of the courts’ budget goes on wages, with the same proportion spent on building maintenance. Lord Hamilton said some courts might be closed, to cut maintenance costs.
He said: “Some of these buildings are rather old, so therefore the maintenance costs have increased. What we’ve begun, and we’re only at the very early stages of it, is looking at what we really want by way of provision of court buildings in the 21st century.
“Most of them are 19th-century and they were created and built in the places where they were created because of the state of the community of that time, including questions of travel and so on.”
Some sheriff courts and justice of the peace courts have already been amalgamated into a single building, and Lord Hamilton said they were looking to do this more, particularly in Glasgow which he called “the biggest prize”.
However, he added: “It may be at some stage we will have to come to the parliament and say we think that certain steps should be taken, perhaps even closing some courts in the future.”
Lord Hamilton contrasted his view with one given by Richard Keen, QC, dean of the Faculty of Advocates, before the same committee last week.
Lord Hamilton said: “The dean used the metaphor of musical chairs. I’m not sure the metaphor is wholly apt. I don’t think we’ve got a situation where chairs are being taken off one at a time. What I do think is that we’ll have the same number of chairs, but they will be smaller chairs which are less comfortable to sit in.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 77 comments to this article
Page 1 of 6
Sally Longlegs
Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 10:33 AMThey should be doing this job for the privilege of serving our country. And they should be forcibly retired at 65 leaving places for younger judges to come through.
The Tin Man
Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 07:12 AMDo these plebs actually bother to get out of bed for £172,000 year? And they have to wear a fancy dress costume. Good grief, it must be terrible to be a peasant.
Tartancult
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 09:33 PMI don't think they are saying that £172,000 is necessary to 'live on' - they are saying they want more money for the job they are doing. Lots of people want more money for the work they do, some get more some do not. The only solution to this particular problem is render their jobs redundant by having no need of their services - fat chance of that ever happening given mankind's propensity for violence etc, hence the need for these judges.
Moniker Lewinsky
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 08:40 PMI really don't think I want someone sitting in judgement on other people who thinks 172 grand is not enough to nlive on. This is ludicrous. They are not captains of industry, they are in effect public sector workers. They need to catch a grip.
Tartancult
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 06:57 PMstu,dundee, I think the reason your posts were moderated is because they were virtually unreadable. If you try to get a point across but do so without regard to grammar, syntax and punctuation etc then your post deserves to be dumped. You may have made some good points (though I doubt it, based on your other posts) but I gave up trying to wade through your incomprehensible utterings.
stu,dundee
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 06:29 PMohh 65..this is my 3rd reply so looks like i have to climb down from the ceiling as my two previous replys have faild to get past the moderator..sp please read into my reply a few expleteves and a generous amout ov sarcasim to ur reply when i said i was peed off .and had my back up ..i think it was pretty obvious i was whinging,only a clown would bring economics into it..i said a nurse was worth more..no figure given.is a judge worth more than £172.000+..to my mind if thats what they get at the moment then fine.,,they shouldnt be trawling round the media for more..sadly there are a few sados on here that bring no substance to a conversation other than critisisim of others points of view..ask your ,wee sister she mite have a few ideas for you
Join now and watch the full movie!
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 06:22 PM2 Cynicus,Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 12:32 AM _______________________________________________________ I agree with you entirely. There are some extremely effective solicitors, advocates and QCs representing their clients in our Courts. The best are handsomely rewarded, self-employed practitioners. Only the best are appointed to sit on the bench to make sure the proceedings are conducted as fairly as possible and in line with the letter and spirit of the law. _______________________________________________________ Anyone can sit in the public gallery at Scottish Courts. I would recommend it to any interested reader.
stu,dundee
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:30 PMComment removed by moderator
George Coutts
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:29 PMI hope the New Scotland is 3 musciteers, one for all, and all for one. Spread the wealth and Scotland will RISE AGAIN.........1707 till now skint is a crime beyond comprehension.
George Coutts
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:23 PMWise up, any more would BE A CRIME!
RadgefromtheWest
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:18 PMQuote from Lord Hamilton above: "One of the problems that we had last year was that there was a competition. But the board, having interviewed a number persons, found that none of those who applied were suitable for appointment." We need a deeper insight into this statement. How did the unsuitable's get an interview in the first place? What kind of competition? Who are the Board ? Are there lay people or politicians on it? I accept that we must trust the Judges to be in charge to navigate us through the law and legal minefields especially in jury trials so the accused get a fair trail. I also think the jury should then have a say in the sentence passed on the guilty.The judge should have the decisive say but the jury should then if they wish be entitled to make known publicly their agreement or otherwise with the sentence.
Derryboy
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 05:14 PMUntil the judiciary are made to take responsibility for their decisions, and forcebly reminded that their job is merely to ensure that the correct legal proceedures are followed during the trial, and not make the law up as they go along as some of them appear to believe.
HighwayChode
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 04:32 PMOh Stu from Dundee stop your pathetic whinging. No a nurse, or a fireman does not deserve more. It is simple economics. Supply and Demand. Many more people are capable of being Firemen, Nurses or Charity Workers. Consequently the supply is larger, the demand lower and so too they're wages. I realise you're trying to appeal to everyone's emotions by using highly emotive careers. If not why not choose other examples, like supermarket workers on comparable wages.
stu,dundee
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 04:16 PMno mr hamilton..a nurse fireman carer volenteer or a charity worker should get more..if you are not happy with your extreamly generous wage .the general public can only assume you and your ilk are more interested in your personnel status.and therefore would not be missed.to a community that is having to cut back on the basics of life...it is only the people who have the most that cry ..if you want the best pay the best..sadly as has been proven in the banks and goverment ,paying large wages bonuses and perks (for the best)has been a myth,,if your learnered friends want more than £172.000.hows about they spend a year working as a nurse on there wage,then come back and say they deseve more...the saying the law is an ass has just been proven by yourself..
New Unionism
Wednesday, November 2, 2011 at 04:09 PMBy the time they pay for their heating bills in their Trinity mansions, send their kids to the favoured private schools to continue the legal nepotism, there can only be a couple of grand a week left! Now the establishment want to void themselves from austerity. You and I will be the Judge of that. Lets face it, there doing less work now that London deals with their appeals business.
Page 1 of 6
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.