Attached is a copy of my draft Duchy of Cornwall Bill and draft Explanatory notes.
The purpose of this Bill is to clarify the status of the Duchy in respect of the application of legislation and that it is in the private sector. The Bill therefore proposed changes to existing legislation covering the tax status of the Duchy, exemptions and immunities including legislation on leasehold, land and planning issues, the Right to Royal Mines within Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, the right to Treasure Trove within Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, the Right to bona vacantia within Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, the Right to escheat within Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, the right of any attorney or solicitor appointed in the affairs of the Duchy of Cornwall and the removal of the right of the Duchy to receive legal advice etc from the Treasury Solicitor.
By way of background, the Government over the years has supported the Duchy’s view that it is in the private sector. For example, in responding in the First Tier Tribunal in Michael Bruton -v- Information Commissioner and the Duchy of Cornwall, it argued that ‘it did not consider itself to be a public authority for the purposes of the EIR or FOIA.’ It had previously suggested that, to for all practical purposes, the Duchy was above the law.
Thus, since the government and the duchy both appear to believe that the Duchy is in the private sector, this Bill is intended to formalise this status and proposes the necessary alterations to legislation to ensure that the private sector status of the Duchy is the same as other similar private sector organisations.
I also welcome the Report of the House of Political and Constitutional Reform’s Eleventh Report ‘The impact of Queen’s and Prince’s Consent on the legislative process’ on 24th March 2014 but believe it does not go far enough in removing the need for Parliament to seek the consent of the Prince of Wales, as Duke of Cornwall, or of any future Duke of Cornwall to the consideration of Bills which pass through Parliament. My Bill addresses this in Clause 5.
I am grateful for the help from Dr John Kirkhope, Notary Public, in the preparation of the draft Bill.
I publish it on Lordsoftheblog since there is no process within the House of Lords for publishing draft Private Members Bill. I welcome comments by e mail or mail to me at the House of Lords.
I hope to introduce the Bill in the Lords soon after the State Opening of Parliament, planned for 3 June 2014, so comments should be received by me by Friday 16th May.
I am sending this draft for comment to the Duke of Cornwall as well.
In preparing this Bill, it has come as somewhat of a surprise to me about the wide range of legislation on which the Duchy has exemption or special provision, and which appears to me to be inappropriate in the 21st Century. This Bill seeks to clarify the status of the Duchy.
I look forward to receiving comments,
Best wishes, Tony
Tony Berkeley
House of Lords
tony@rfg.org.uk
Lordsoftheblog/Berkeley
@tonyberkeley1
@Lord Berkeley:
Unfortunately the link you put up to enable us to peruse this document doesn’t connect with the page to do so. Trying to copy and paste also does not work. As I would be very interested in reading this document, would it be possible for you to connect the url with the link to its page so that we can see what it says.
With thanks.
Maude Elwes
Should work now Maude.
I understood the people of Cornwall were (or at least a number were) proud of the semi-separate status – is there likely to be support among the people to replace the Duchy with the Crown and lump them in with the rest of us?
There are a couple of typos in clause 12(2), one too many ‘this’s and one too few ‘is’.
I don’t know (or can’t recall) why cl. 1 wasn’t included in the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 but best of luck with that.
Thankfully The Duke of Cornwall does not rule Cornwall any more than the Queen’s consort rules Edinburgh. The Constitutional separation of Cornwall /Cornubia from England is an actively sought topic, but the Duchy is not the same as Cornwall, and large parts of its land-holdings are in Devon and elsewhere.
It is not plausible to have Monarchy and its fall out mixed with modern democracy. Equality cannot comfortably rest in the same bed with total inequality. More than separation is needed here, it is the ‘sacrificial’ requirement of noblesse oblige.
Thanks for all comments. I’ll correct the typos in the final version, but this is a draft bill for consultation. So for Andrew George MP to complain in the Guardian and Western morning News that he had not been consulted is a bit rich – this is the document for consultation, which incidentally was sent to all Cornwall MPs some days before the press articles appeared!
Tony Berkeley