I beg to move,"That this House does not insist on their Amendment No. 53 to which the Lords have disagreed and agrees to amendments 53A to 53C proposed by the Lords in lieu of that Amendment."
Under Commons amendment 53, we would have retained the office of the chief coroner in statute but transferred its functions to the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor. However, we recognised the desire to have a single judicial figure responsible for leading the coroner system, a view that was expressed in both Houses and by a range of stakeholders. We therefore tabled further amendments in the Lords that would allow us to implement the office of the chief coroner without delay and bring into force the range of chief coroner powers envisaged under part 1 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
We will not, however, implement the appeals provision under section 40 of the 2009 Act, which will be repealed. That will leave in place the existing system of redress, so that decisions can still be contested by way of judicial review or by application to the High Court by, or under the authority of, the Attorney-General.
The proposal before us will provide the system with leadership and will bring further improvements to jurisdiction, training and monitoring, and it will allow us to bring about all those things without further delay.
Public Bodies Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Jonathan Djanogly
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 29 November 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Public Bodies Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
536 c881-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 19:22:38 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789750
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789750
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789750