Skip to main content

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


Shipman Inquiry

It is a privilege to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Chris McCafferty). She and the Minister for Pensions Reform, my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (James Purnell), have been at the forefront of the campaign for justice for Dr. Harold Shipman’s victims. I echo all of the views that she expressed. As one of the three Members of Parliament for the metropolitan borough of Tameside, I am grateful to be allowed to contribute briefly to the debate. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde would have liked to contribute as well, because the Shipman tragedy so directly affected his constituency, as it did mine, to a much smaller extent, but, as has been explained, he is not able to take part due to ministerial protocol. I welcome the Minister’s thoughtful comments, the details in the various reports before us and the work of the Select Committee on Constitutional Affairs. We should never forget the extent of the tragedy, in which hundreds of families in Tameside lost their loved ones. The extent of Dr. Shipman’s crimes are such that it is hard for anyone who was not involved or from the affected communities to understand just how deep the wounds are and, in some cases, will be for some time. Despite that, the communities of Tameside, particularly the town of Hyde and the parts of Denton that were covered by Dr. Shipman’s surgery, have not let him win. The borough has pulled together to make sure that we are defined not by that tragedy, but by our successes. Tameside officially has the best council in the north-west of England, and the area is growing rapidly and becoming increasingly prosperous as a result of massive inward investment. We should focus on those positives in Hyde, Denton and Tameside. I strongly agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley that by ending his life, Harold Shipman took the one thing that he could and should have given the affected families: access to the truth and the full story, and information about the full implications of his actions. What the Government can do, however, is ensure that such a situation can never happen again. I was reassured, as, I am sure, were my hon. Friends, by the Minister’s positive and forward-looking opening remarks. I know that my hon. Friend for Stalybridge and Hyde has had regular contact with the families, and that they have met Ministers several times. The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), and the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale, East (Paul Goggins), both visited Tameside in their official capacities to discuss the proposals while—this is the important point—they were being developed. The families in Tameside welcomed the inquiry of Lady Justice Janet Smith and her team, and they are as committed as we all are to ensuring that the Government implement the inquiry’s findings. The onus is on us to ensure that that happens, so I welcome the spirit in which the Government have approached this issue and I reiterate that the Minister’s remarks were very positive. It is also positive that we have been allowed to air our views on this matter again in the debate. Reform of the coroners system and the need for tighter regulation of the medical profession are central issues. In its inquiry, the Select Committee thoroughly examined many issues regarding the reform of the coroners system, and its report and findings are to be welcomed, taken alongside what the Government have been doing. However, I wish to raise a small number of issues with the Minister, which follow my hon. Friend’s comments almost directly. The first issue that I want to address is death certification. The Select Committee report rightly highlighted concerns about death certification and the Government’s approach to it. Lady Justice Janet Smith also highlighted a number of concerns about the proposals for changes to the coroners system, particularly how death certificates will be checked and monitored. The Minister has considered the proposals, and he told us that a single process will be operated through local primary care trusts. I hope that that means that there will be a single process for both cremation and burial certificates. Patients have always been concerned that Dr. Shipman could have written almost anything on certificates—that he could have written ““Donald Duck”” or ““Mickey Mouse”” and it would have gone almost unchecked. That is a real worry for the families concerned. Will the Minister reassure us that the changes to the system that he proposes will address that worry, because people are very concerned that some of those practices went unnoticed for so long? He has assured us that a Bill will be introduced when there is parliamentary time. I understand the pressures that exist and that he might not be able to give firm commitments, but it is important, certainly for the families involved, that there is some degree of certainty about when the changes will be introduced. I understand that he cannot give absolute time scales, because of the programming of future legislation, but what are the general time scales in which we can expect some of the measures to be introduced? The families also made a key point about medical regulation. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley that the system should have flagged up what Dr. Shipman was doing a long time before it did. Of course, hindsight is a wonderful thing, but we know that he had a record of drug use and that he had been investigated and suspended in his previous post in her constituency. His death and prescription rates were considerably higher than they should have been, and should therefore have been detected, but they were not, so there are those issues to address. How will the system work differently to ensure that something similar could not happen? That is an important point. On a more general level, the Select Committee emphasised the importance of medical regulation and scrutiny. Is the Minister confident that we are reforming the overall system, particularly in relation to medical regulation? That is crucial and is at the root of the problem. Finally, it is worth recognising that the draft Coroners Bill was the first to be scrutinised in Westminster by families with recent experience of the inquest system. That is why it is so crucial that we get things right and why the Select Committee was absolutely right to highlight further areas in which work is required. The Minister has gone some way towards clarifying the Government’s intentions. Getting things right will not erase the pain brought about by Dr. Shipman’s activities, but it will make it more difficult for a similar episode to occur. That will offer some comfort and a sense of positive closure to the families concerned. I thank the Minister for his positive and thoughtful approach so far, and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Stalybridge and Hyde and the communities that we represent look forward to hearing his response.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
461 c523-5WH 
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