Proceeding contribution from Andrew Percy (Conservative) 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]
I thank the Minister for that. The question of the appeals process is not quite as simple or clear-cut as has been presented. Despite referring to the appeals process when I moved my amendment a few weeks ago, it was not one of the main drivers behind my joining the campaign. The fact that under the previous legislation it was accepted that the process would not start for some time demonstrates the difficulties that arise. There is the perception or concern that some people might use the appeals process almost to continue the grieving process. Members have talked about getting closure, but actually the appeals process can postpone that closure, which can be difficult for families. I understand, therefore, that this is a difficult issue. The Opposition spokesperson made a sensible proposal—about having a trial—but that is not necessarily the answer, because, as the Minister said, those decisions can be judicially reviewed. The key point about the chief coroner was his role in driving the necessary reforms, which can continue with or without the appeals process.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 536 c887
- 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 19:22:41 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789768
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789768
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789768