Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 4 December 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.


Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that intervention. I do not have the precise figures, but that ties in with my recollection. We are not talking about one or two such cases a decade. There is a consistent pattern of suicide in prison, for which no blame can attach to anybody. [Interruption.] There is no point in the Secretary of State huffing and puffing; he should look carefully at the figures. The key issue is that there is a consistent pattern of instances of suicides in prison that were deemed to have been preventable. However, just because something may have been preventable does not necessarily mean that it should lead to a corporate manslaughter charge. What I am saying is that there can be no philosophical or rational justification for exempting Government Departments from the possibility of culpability in this field, particularly in view of what custody actually is.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
454 c99 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Accountability Detainees Death Company law Companies Directors Convictions Crown immunity Corporate manslaughter Disqualification Liability Health and safety Exemptions Government departments Holding companies Prosecutions Prisons Management Police custody Staff Negligence Scotland Remand in custody
Legislation
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill 2005-06 to 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk