James Dean’s article ‘Call to divide AG’s dual role’ (see [2008] Gazette,, 7 August, 4) unfortunately gave only a very partial account of a substantial piece of work by the Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill, which I chaired. In fairness to your readers, I would like to set the record straight about the committee’s report.

Your coverage focused mainly on the role of the Attorney General, on which there was indeed a difference of opinion in the committee. But the committee’s report was wide-ranging, covering subjects such as protest around Parliament, the Civil Service, ratification of treaties, judicial appointments and the government’s war-making powers. Although there were disagreements on some aspects of some of these issues, the committee’s overall report was agreed unanimously, and it is disappointing that your article ignored this important fact.

Your report was therefore in error in referring to a minority report. No such report was ever tabled.

Michael Foster MPChairman, Joint Committee Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill

  • Editor’s note: The cross-party group which produced an alternative chapter on the role of the Attorney General described this as a ‘minority report’. However, we are happy to clarify that no such report was formally tabled.