All experience shows that it is the latter. It would be up to the Secretary of State to decide that on the certificate, and there is no way of getting behind that certificate in court.
There is broad scope for the abuse of these powers. The question that the hon. Member for Hendon asked needs to be answered in the affirmative: yes, it would have made a difference if these powers had existed sooner; and, yes, it would have resulted in more inquests being held without juries. As the hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd) said, the only conclusion that one can draw is that we must excise clause 11 from the Bill. There might be better ways forward, and there might be other ways of doing this. We do not know what the Government might propose if we were to excise the clause, but excise it we must, in order to allow further and better debate on this subject in another place. I therefore beg to ask leave to withdraw the new clause, although I wish to press amendment 2 to a vote.
Clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Howarth
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 March 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c117 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:50:10 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543505
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543505
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543505