I am grateful to the Minister for his expansion and response, and particularly for his pointing up that the existence of a Chief Coroner is in a sense a port of call for the Care Quality Commission or for an inquiry should a coroner not accede to co-operative engagement. I take it that that is the impact of what he is saying. This is one of the Bill’s important developments. If I have understood that correctly—I see that the Minister is nodding—that is an important point that we hope would not be necessary, but the fact that it is there may make it unnecessary because people know that there is that possibility.
I am grateful for the Minister’s clarification that the Government are looking at regulations, so that in respect of medical examiners the Care Quality Commission would be able to press for co-operation and for people to produce material. I want to look at what the Minister has said in some detail, but if there is already progress in regard to proposed changes of regulations I would be grateful if it were possible to have sight of it at an appropriate time. With that appreciation and response I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 70 withdrawn.
Amendment 71 not moved.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Alderdice
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 23 June 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c1521 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:28:18 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569916
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569916
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569916