Some practicalities are involved. Everyone in the House would concede that the Prison Service is in a state of flux—to put it neutrally—given some of the problems that it is experiencing. Some might say that that makes it even more important that the law comes into effect more promptly. However, if our intention is not to witch-hunt but to put right the Prison Service and stop such deaths, which is the purpose of the Bill, it is important that the ombudsman has a statutory footing and is able to investigate and make recommendations, that there are proper responses to coroners’ recommendations on deaths in custody, and that the forum has the teeth that it needs to make real progress. I hope that that will happen quickly.
If the measures are not brought into effect, the Government remain vulnerable to an article 2 challenge. I am prepared to give the Government a little leeway and the benefit of the doubt, but, if there were a challenge, I could not say whether the courts would do the same. My hon. Friend needs to act quickly on his proposed measures if he is to satisfy not just this House but the other place.
Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Andrew Dismore
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 16 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c676-7 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-12 19:17:07 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397257
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397257
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397257