Schedule 3
Coroners and Justice Bill
7:00 pm
Jennifer Willott (Cardiff Central, Liberal Democrat)
The amendments and new clauses go together quite well as a group. They are designed to introduce standards for coroners in various ways. Amendment 259 relates to the terms and conditions on coroners; amendment 258 would mean that the coroner must publish regulations on training for senior coroners; new clause 28 would enable the chief coroner to publish minimum standards that should apply to all senior coroners in the UK; and new clause 29 would enable the chief coroner to publish guidance on salaries and fees.
This matter has been raised a number of times already, so I shall be brief. There are concerns about the inconsistencies in the United Kingdom, both on standards of service delivery and on the terms and conditions, salaries, equipment, staffing and support that is provided to coroners by local authorities. The proposals would improve the uniformity of the service that is delivered to bereaved families. New clause 28 would mean that the chief coroner would be able to publish minimum standards by which local authorities would have to be guided when funding offices—accommodation and staff—to ensure that coroners have the basic minimum of support that they need to fulfil their jobs. Because those standards would be laid out by the chief coroner, it would not be so much in the hands of local authorities to decide what they believe is appropriate. Instead, a basic minimum standard would be applied, which would help coroners in their dealings with local authorities.
We have already highlighted the issue of training. The Government accept that there is a need for improved consistency in training in the UK to ensure that there is better uniformity in different coroners’ areas. The Bill states that the chief coroner may publish regulations about training, but amendment 258 would ensure that such guidance is published. Given that we all accept the need for it, it seems somewhat surprising that the Bill enables rather than ensures. That is clearly important for coroners and for all of us.
I accept that the proposal on terms and conditions and on salary guidance is slightly contentious. However, a key issue in some areas is that coroners are not in a strong position when negotiating with local authorities. For example, the area that the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth and I represent is covered by the coroner for Cardiff and Vale of Glamorgan, who is employed only on a part-time basis, despite the fact that she works full-time hours. The local authority has decided that it only wants a part-time coroner despite the fact that her work load is far too large. Laying down central standards and guidance for local authorities on salaries and fees would rule out such anomalies. The guidance could take into account such things as the number of inquests, investigations and deaths reported, and the size of an area. It could also consider transfers between areas, and generally take into account a coroner’s overall work load.
Clearly, the chief coroner is in a much better position to consider such things, because they gather information and can see the bigger picture throughout the UK, whereas local authorities see a very small part of the picture and are not in the best position to make decisions on how much coroners should be paid for how many hours, and what support staff they need to do their jobs. Currently, as we all accept, there is significant inconsistency.
I hope that the four proposals provide a solid basis to enable coroners to do their job with the resources that they need.