Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Chris McCafferty (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 21 June 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Shipman Inquiry.


Shipman Inquiry

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents in Calder Valley and those of the Minister for Pensions Reform, my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (James Purnell), who, as you pointed out, Mr. Hancock, is in the Chamber but may not speak because of his ministerial responsibilities. I thank the Minister for outlining the proposals which, I stress, are historic and wide ranging. He is correct that we would not have reached the stage that we are now at without huge political will. The proposals will set out for the first time a national framework for the work of coroners, who will become full-time professionals, with a chief coroner heading the service. The proposals will empower bereaved families by giving them, for the first time, a proper legal standing. They will have the right to a second opinion, and the ability to challenge coroners’ rulings. Those changes will be welcomed by families who have had a relative die a violent or sudden death, but especially by families who were patients of Harold Shipman, such as my constituents in Todmorden in the Calder Valley and, of course, many constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde. We should never forget the extent of the tragedy, especially for the hundreds of families in Hyde and Tameside who lost loved ones. The extent and magnitude of Harold Shipman’s crimes were such that they were hard to encompass, unless one was personally involved and touched by the tragedy. Of course, by killing himself and going to his grave, Harold Shipman robbed all those families of the one thing that he could have given them: the truth—the right to know what happened and perhaps to help to put an end to what for most of the people concerned is a continuing horror story. The Government can help by making sure that the lessons of what happened in the Harold Shipman case are learned. That case gives rise to today’s debate and is probably the case of the greatest magnitude, but there are other instances in which GPs and medical and health professionals have not only gone beyond the bounds of their duty, but have behaved in a wholly inappropriate way, in relation to the life and death of their patients. The reforms are definitely necessary. I hope that the reforms will ensure that a tragedy like the Shipman case can never happen again. My hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde has had regular contact with the bereaved families in his constituency, and he has told me that he never ceases to be impressed by their resilience and their commitment to ensuring that reforms are made. They have met Ministers several times and have helped to develop the new proposals. My own constituents in Todmorden believe that Dame Janet Smith has done a remarkable job in very difficult circumstances. Of course, in the case of my constituents the events happened at the beginning of Harold Shipman’s time in practice. It was very difficult for those families when the bodies were exhumed, because the deaths were so long ago that there was little if any medical evidence to be assessed. That did not make things any easier. Families in Hyde have always made their respect for Dame Janet and her team, and their commitment to the implementation of her findings, very clear. I want to express my own gratitude for the dedication that all Ministers concerned have shown to introducing good and relevant legislation, for the spirit in which the Government have approached all the reforms, and for today’s debate. My biggest concern, which is central to the debate, is the proposed reform of the coroners system by the draft Coroners Bill, and the reform of the regulation of the medical profession initiated by the chief medical officer. It is widely known that Dame Janet has concerns about some of the proposals in the Bill, particularly the way in which death certificates are to be checked. I know that the Minister has examined the proposals carefully and that, as has already been said, it is intended that there will now be a single process for both cremation and burial certificates, operated through local primary care trusts. That is a very welcome development. There has always been widespread concern among patients—certainly among my constituents in Todmorden— about the fact that Shipman could write any name he fancied on medical certificates and it would not make a scrap of difference; they would still be accepted, and not detected as fraudulent. I should be grateful if my hon. Friend assured me that the new system will deal with those concerns. In addition—I know that other hon. Members have already asked about this—will he try to clarify the time scale for the introduction of the reforms? I am particularly interested to know whether the reforms will be extraterritorial. Will the family of someone who has died abroad, perhaps in suspicious circumstances, be able to contribute to the coroner’s investigation or challenge the verdict? Will the Government implement the suggestion that a simple information leaflet should be provided to bereaved families, setting out their rights? When does my hon. Friend expect the draft Bill to be presented to Parliament? Another key question, which I think all the families have asked, particularly in Todmorden, given that Harold Shipman practised there for a period before going to Hyde, is why the medical system could not identify him earlier. When he practised in Todmorden he was found to be abusing drugs. That was brought to light by an eagle-eyed medical practitioner who was his colleague. Shipman was subsequently investigated and suspended from the Todmorden medical practice, and convicted in the Halifax court of misuse of drugs and prescription fraud. However, he was then able to go down the road and carry on practising in Hyde, with no monitoring at all. In both Todmorden and Hyde, his prescription and death rates were off the Richter scale, but he was never detected. How does the Minister think the new system will ensure that that cannot happen again? Does he have confidence that we are now reforming the system overall? Are all the pieces of the jigsaw falling into place? Joined-up thinking and the interconnectedness of the reforms are important considerations, which, as the Minister pointed out, have caused some delays in implementation—and he is right that the reforms need to stand the test of time. I expect he understands the frustration of Members of Parliament whose constituents have been affected by Harold Shipman, and of the general public, who feel great anxiety about whether they will be protected in the future. Only a very small minority of medical practitioners abuse their powers, and the vast majority of GPs and health professionals are in that business because they want to help people, but the affair has left a very bad taste in many people’s mouths, as well as a lot of fear. The general public are anxious for the reforms to be implemented. Given all that I have said, and given our understanding of the need for interconnectedness, joined-up thinking and transparency, and the fact that it is important to get the reforms right for the 21st century, perhaps the Minister will tell us when he expects the reforms to be fully and finally implemented.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
461 c521-3WH 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Complaints Coroners Inquiries Homicide Legislation General practitioners NHS Patients Protection Prescription drugs Regulation Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Harold Shipman Tribunal of Inquiry Shipman, Harold
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk