Proceeding contribution from Jon Trickett (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 29 November 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Public Bodies Bill [Lords].
Public Bodies Bill [Lords]
There may be some judicial reviews under the chief coroner, but they will be fewer in number. It will be a far more efficient system. At the end of the day, we want to do what the families want. The families are saying to us—the British Legion questioned individual families—that they do not want what the Government are trying to achieve. If the Government's reasoning is to save money, it would be more efficient, better emotionally and cheaper to allow section 40 to remain on the statute book so that a decision can be made in the fullness of time, with all the options having been carefully considered. It has been suggested that removing the right of appeal, which was in the original Act and which the Government now wish to achieve, will effectively neuter the role of the chief coroner. More sinister than that is a rumour that is now circulating that the Government intend simply to fail to fill the post of chief coroner. Will the Minister now tell the House when he intends to fill that post?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 536 c886
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Coroners Judicial review Public bodies Youth justice Youth Justice Board Chief Coroner
- Legislation
- Public Bodies Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 19:22:40 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789763
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789763
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789763