Chamber
Plenary, 27 Mar 2008
27 Mar 2008 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Fatal Accident Inquiries
I welcome the debate and Lord Cullen's forthcoming review, which will be the first proper review of the legislation on fatal accident inquiries in more than 30 years. I agree that it is vital to ensure that Scotland has a robust and effective system for public inquiry into sudden, unexplained or suspicious deaths and that that system can keep pace with other changes to the country's justice system and with the ECHR. We echo the Solicitor General's thanks to Lord Cullen for undertaking that important work.
Fatal accident inquiries can play a vital role in providing bereaved families with answers at a time of great distress and, in theory, they can provide for changes to prevent further loss of life, protect against future tragedies and reassure the public after serious incidents. However, as with most systems, a number of concerns are felt about how the FAI system works in practice, so the Liberal Democrats welcome the review under Lord Cullen. Close scrutiny is important not only to improve the system, but to increase public confidence in it.
I will cover some of the grounds for concern, but I begin by focusing on the amendment in my name, which I sincerely hope that MSPs across the parties will feel able to support. I thank the Presiding Officer for allowing me to withdraw my earlier amendment and to lodge an alternative amendment.
Every bereaved family is worthy of our support, assistance and respect, but surely the families of those who have given their lives in the service of our country deserve the right to have the circumstances of their deaths dealt with here in Scotland timeously and reasonably. The 1976 act does not cover deaths that occur overseas. In the past few months, I have highlighted the unacceptable situation whereby grieving families must cope with significant delays as well as long journeys to attend coroners' inquests in the south of England, where the bodies of their loved ones have been repatriated.
I know that the Scottish Government and the UK Government have discussed options. One option might be to amend the 1976 act to allow sheriffs to hold inquiries into the deaths of military personnel who are normally domiciled in Scotland and who die on active service overseas.
My concerns are shared by many in this Parliament and at Westminster and by several Scottish National Party members. In January 2007, Alex Salmond condemned the delay in forces inquests and said that the Government needed
"to take immediate action to rectify this situation now. Many service families are suffering unnecessary delays due to this problem. It is disgraceful that the Government is still not prepared to fulfil their inescapable duty to the families, to those who have made the extreme sacrifice, by ensuring that inquests are completed swiftly".
I agree with the First Minister and I urge the Government that he leads to fulfil its duty to those service personnel and their grieving families in whatever manner it can.
We have heard that the review will take a year, which is understandable, given the subject's complexity and sensitivity. However, we need to address military deaths urgently. As of November 2007, 20 Scottish soldiers had lost their lives in Iraq alone. Since 2001, a total of 253 British servicemen and women have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. Under the current legislation, all their deaths must be investigated by coroners' inquests in England, where their bodies are repatriated. The scale of the loss has meant huge delays in the system, because there are simply not enough staff or resources to complete the large number of inquests. The UK Government has taken steps to address those difficulties.
Only two of the inquests into the deaths of the 20 Scottish soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq were completed within a year. One family had to wait more than four and a half years for answers, and the delays continue to increase as the problem worsens.
Fatal accident inquiries can play a vital role in providing bereaved families with answers at a time of great distress and, in theory, they can provide for changes to prevent further loss of life, protect against future tragedies and reassure the public after serious incidents. However, as with most systems, a number of concerns are felt about how the FAI system works in practice, so the Liberal Democrats welcome the review under Lord Cullen. Close scrutiny is important not only to improve the system, but to increase public confidence in it.
I will cover some of the grounds for concern, but I begin by focusing on the amendment in my name, which I sincerely hope that MSPs across the parties will feel able to support. I thank the Presiding Officer for allowing me to withdraw my earlier amendment and to lodge an alternative amendment.
Every bereaved family is worthy of our support, assistance and respect, but surely the families of those who have given their lives in the service of our country deserve the right to have the circumstances of their deaths dealt with here in Scotland timeously and reasonably. The 1976 act does not cover deaths that occur overseas. In the past few months, I have highlighted the unacceptable situation whereby grieving families must cope with significant delays as well as long journeys to attend coroners' inquests in the south of England, where the bodies of their loved ones have been repatriated.
I know that the Scottish Government and the UK Government have discussed options. One option might be to amend the 1976 act to allow sheriffs to hold inquiries into the deaths of military personnel who are normally domiciled in Scotland and who die on active service overseas.
My concerns are shared by many in this Parliament and at Westminster and by several Scottish National Party members. In January 2007, Alex Salmond condemned the delay in forces inquests and said that the Government needed
"to take immediate action to rectify this situation now. Many service families are suffering unnecessary delays due to this problem. It is disgraceful that the Government is still not prepared to fulfil their inescapable duty to the families, to those who have made the extreme sacrifice, by ensuring that inquests are completed swiftly".
I agree with the First Minister and I urge the Government that he leads to fulfil its duty to those service personnel and their grieving families in whatever manner it can.
We have heard that the review will take a year, which is understandable, given the subject's complexity and sensitivity. However, we need to address military deaths urgently. As of November 2007, 20 Scottish soldiers had lost their lives in Iraq alone. Since 2001, a total of 253 British servicemen and women have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. Under the current legislation, all their deaths must be investigated by coroners' inquests in England, where their bodies are repatriated. The scale of the loss has meant huge delays in the system, because there are simply not enough staff or resources to complete the large number of inquests. The UK Government has taken steps to address those difficulties.
Only two of the inquests into the deaths of the 20 Scottish soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq were completed within a year. One family had to wait more than four and a half years for answers, and the delays continue to increase as the problem worsens.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on S3M-1638, in the name of Frank Mulholland, on fatal accident inquiries. Members might wish to note that a revised se...
The Solicitor General for Scotland (Frank Mulholland):
I welcome the opportunity to open today's debate. On 7 March, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice announced that he and the Lord Advocate had agreed that there...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
The Solicitor General for Scotland is opening the debate on the Government's behalf, so will he answer my question on the Government's behalf? What is the Go...
The Solicitor General for Scotland:
I thank the member for his question, which raises an important point. The matter is reserved, because defence is reserved, so it needs to be considered and w...
Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
I welcome the debate and Lord Cullen's forthcoming review, which will be the first proper review of the legislation on fatal accident inquiries in more than ...
Keith Brown (Ochil) (SNP):
SNP
I seek clarification. Margaret Smith has mentioned Scottish soldiers a couple of times, and her amendment mentions both"personnel, normally domiciled in Scot...
Margaret Smith:
LD
Yes. I included the phrase "normally domiciled in Scotland" to clarify that.Families who have lost loved ones through service for our country deserve our sup...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
I begin by welcoming the review of the legislation governing fatal accident inquiries in Scotland. I particularly welcome the choice of Lord Cullen of Whitek...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
This is a useful debate. As members of the Justice Committee will be aware, I was minded to recommend that, as a result of a petition from Norman Dunning on ...
Keith Brown (Ochil) (SNP):
SNP
The motion welcomes an independent review by a figure of the highest reputation and legal standing to resolve a set of problems that I hope we all agree exis...
Michael McMahon (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab):
Lab
When I had the privilege of being convener of the Public Petitions Committee, two of the most harrowing petitions that I encountered, from Enable and from th...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I welcome this extremely interesting debate. The Solicitor General and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice are aware that, along with Margaret Smith and, as it...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this afternoon's debate. Like Pauline McNeill and Michael McMahon, I will support the amendment in t...
Michael Matheson (Falkirk West) (SNP):
SNP
I welcome the review and the fact that Lord Cullen has been appointed to undertake it. As many have said, he is an individual with great experience in this f...
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD):
LD
Will Michael Matheson comment on whether we should consider adopting in legislation the system in America, where it is illegal to overtake a school bus at an...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
That is a bit far away from the subject of fatal accident inquires.
Michael Matheson:
SNP
It is, but it is an issue that a fatal accident inquiry could consider, and it may be one of its recommendations. That brings me neatly to the issue of an in...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate. It is an important one on an issue that affects families and communities the length and breadth of Sc...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I will address my remarks—as usual, very late in the debate—to one particular issue that is expected to be considered during the review: the status of recomm...
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD):
LD
Scotland is widely perceived to be a reasonably safe place to live and it is relied on as such. Whatever activity someone takes part in, be it white-water ra...
John Lamont (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con):
Con
The debate and the review of the law on fatal accident inquiries are welcome. As others have said, Lord Cullen's wealth of experience makes him ideally equip...
Christine Grahame:
SNP
Does the member share my concern about the deterioration of evidence when there are delays?
John Lamont:
Con
Indeed. If things are not dealt with in a timely manner, there is a danger that evidence becomes less good and less reliable. I agree with Christine Grahame'...
Paul Martin (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab):
Lab
Despite popular belief, we occasionally agree with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, and the time is right for us to support him in his review of the legisl...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill):
SNP
I welcome the spirit in which the debate has taken place and the concordat that the parties reached beforehand on the amendment, which we are happy to suppor...
Pauline McNeill:
Lab
I know that we will have a debate on this matter, but will the cabinet secretary first of all accept and act on the words of the Secretary of State for Defen...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
The short answer is that we cannot act until we have the flexibility provided by changes to the Scotland Act 1998. We are a creature of that statute and are ...
Karen Gillon:
Lab
If the Parliament votes for the amendment in the name of Margaret Smith, which suggests that the holding of FAIs into the deaths of Scottish service personne...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
We have indicated our general support for the idea—that is why we support Margaret Smith's amendment. I would be delighted if we could deal with the issue ou...
Margaret Smith:
LD
Is it the cabinet secretary's understanding that the UK Government would be prepared to support the making of a section 30 order on the issue, given that bot...