Memorandum submitted by Caroline Beasley-Murray (CJ 26)

 

 

Dear Minister,

 

Coroners and Justice Bill

 

I hope that you will forgive this direct approach but I understand that time is of the essence since the Scrutiny Committee will be meeting again next week.

 

I briefed all the Essex Members of Parliament prior to the Select Committee's consideration of the draft Bill and prior to the second reading debate. I was present in the Gallery for the second reading debate and as Vice-Chair of the Law Review and General Purposes Committee of the Coroners' Society of England and Wales, I have been heavily involved in the response of the Coroners Society to the Bill and discussions as to how we coroners can advise and influence the government at this crucial stage in the passage of legislation of such momentous importance for the coronial service.

 

I am legally qualified (a former barrister) and have been the whole time coroner for the Essex and Thurrock District since 2000. I also sit as a Tribunal Judge for the Mental Health Review Tribunal and am a former lay magistrate.

 

You kindly visited Essex very soon after your appointment and so you will know that the Essex and Thurrock district comprises all of the county of Essex, excluding the unitary authority of Southend, and has a population in excess of a million people. Within this jurisdiction are Stansted Airport, HM Prison Chelmsford and Young Offenders' Institution, an Army Garrison, four large hospital trusts, many large industrial areas, an extensive coastline, sections of motorway and other major roads, rural areas etc.

 

Last year 4,700 deaths were reported to me and this district, currently one of the busiest in the country, would appear to be of a similar size to that envisaged in the reformed coroner service.

 

I am fully committed to the future of the coroner service and wish to strive for and work within an improved and reformed service.

 

I support the submissions made by the Coroners Society of England and Wales. I have seen the submission made to you directly by Mrs Selena Lynch and I endorse all the points which she has raised with you.

 

It was clear from the second reading debate that there appears to be broad cross party support for the coroner provisions contained in the Bill and my fear is that this may result in less rigorous scrutiny of the coroner provisions than might have been the case, and that legislation will be passed which contains far reaching risks for the coroner service in the future.

 

I appreciate that this is not the time for detailed consultation but I would like to highlight succinctly some areas where I perceive the danger of serious, undesirable consequences. I am drawing heavily upon my experience over the years and recent developments here in Essex.

 

 

1. Coroner's Officers

 

· Independence

 

In his Fundamental Review, Tom Luce drew attention to the irony that the coroner does not line manage the coroner's officers who are his case workers and carry out delegated coronial responsibilities. Mr Luce recommended that coroner's officers should come under the umbrella of a national coroner service, independent of both the police and the local authority, and this was the stance taken in the government's (Home Office) Position Paper. The tension caused by coroner's officers having to "serve two masters" - being line managed by the police or local authority and, at the same time, carrying out responsibilities under delegated coronial authority - causes untold difficulties. My recent experience in Essex accords with Mrs Lynch's observations about endangered independence and is that the local authority may well be even more assiduous in their line management and show even less understanding than the police of the fundamental importance of the delegated authority element. The Bill does nothing to address this problem and its contents may well exacerbate it.

 

 

 

· Resources

 

Clause 23 envisages that arrangements be made locally for the provision of coroner's officers and staff and I heartily endorse Mrs Lynch's prediction of "even short term collapse of the service" during times of transfer of responsibility between the police and the local authority. Over the years, Essex Police had neglected the coroner's officers' establishment so that it was seriously under resourced and totally lacked resilience. During the twelve months of negotiation preceding transfer of management, the establishment was further neglected so that on 1 December 2008, Essex County Council inherited a gravely depleted establishment. It would appear that Essex Police had been spending only 90% of its budget by not replacing coroner's officers. You will know, Minister, that this has resulted in a highly unsatisfactory Inquest backlog, including a number of Inquests touching upon deaths in HM Prison Chelmsford. Essex County Council is determined to build up the service but this will take time and enormous effort. This Essex experience may well be mirrored in other districts.

 

 

· Training and status

 

Tom Luce also recommended a career structure and mandatory training for coroners' officers. A previous draft of the Bill did mention coroners' officers and so put them on a statutory footing. The government has consistently promised to be involved in the delivery of coroner officer training and the raising of the status of these vitally important contributors to the coroner service. My coroner's officers, many of whom are highly dedicated to the role professionally, are all interested in the reform process since their futures depend on it. It is regrettable that, in this latest draft, there is no mention of coroners' officers.

 

 

2. Court Accommodation

 

Clause 23 requires the local authority to provide accommodation "appropriate to the needs of those coroners carrying out their functions"

 

The provision of court accommodation here in Essex is totally inadequate. For over eight years, with the support of Simon Burns MP West Chelmsford, I have crusaded for purpose built court accommodation which I would regard as essential for one of the busiest jurisdictions in the country (please see details of nature of jurisdiction above). There is great difficulty in booking court accommodation for jury inquests - in the council chamber, council meetings and citizenship ceremonies take priority over inquests and the other venues used are not regularly available and have real disadvantages. In no way would the accommodation meet the requirements laid down in the draft charter in the way of facilities such as dedicated interview rooms.

My fear is that the proposed legislation does not ensure that local authorities will provide accommodation fit for a reformed service. Clause23(4) requires only that the senior coroner's views must be "taken into account". There will, I fear, continue to be vast discrepancies between the accommodation provisions in different jurisdictions.

 

 

3. Medical Examiners

 

In November 2004 I was instrumental in setting up a medical examiner pilot scheme here in Essex under the auspices of the Home Office and it is proposed that later this year there will be piloted a scheme, resourced by the Department of Health, as envisaged in the Bill. I therefore have a particular interest in this subject.

 

Both Tom Luce and Dame Janet Smith in their reports recommended that a system of medical examiners should be created under the aegis of the coroner service. Such a system would be independent of all other agencies, including Primary Care Trusts.

 

Clause 18(2)(b) requires that the appointing trust monitors the performance of medical examiners. I fear that clause 18(5) does not introduce a strong enough degree of independence to the role. It is my view that, in order to safeguard the vital independence of the role, the medical examiner should be ultimately accountable to the chief medical officer. An analogy would be the coroner who is appointed by the local authority but is ultimately accountable to the Lord Chancellor.

 

In the light of the present tight timescale, I have simply drawn attention briefly to these three aspects which trouble me and many of my coroner colleagues. Do let me know if I can assist further.

 

March 2009