Speech in the Scottish Parliament

16 March 2011
 
 
I am very pleased that we have reached stage 3 of the bill and that its consideration is coming to an end.

I tend to disagree with Ian McKee, in that I think that the bill is very technical, but I agree that it is incredibly important.

As was said at stage 2 and again today, the Shipman inquiry led to the bill and our work on it to see how it would affect the issues raised.

It was acknowledged early in the process that it would be impossible to stop another Shipman, but the bill might act as a deterrent.

I hope that it will also lead to better recording of the reasons for death.

I have a number of points on the pilots and implementation, and I make no apology for repeating much of what I said in the stage 1 debate.

When I raised issues to do with the collection of fees by registrars and asked what would happen if a death were registered by a police officer or a neighbour, the minister said that she hoped that she could send out a reassuring message on that but, rather than reassurance, we need a clear solution.

I ask her to bring forward such a solution, which should be available not only to people such as police officers, who might be asked to register a death, but to the likes of neighbours and friends of the deceased, who might wish to help a bereaved family in that way.

I welcomed the minister’s assurance in the stage 1 debate that non-payment of the fee would not delay certification, but clear guidance must be provided so that registrars know what to do in the process.

Another issue that I raised in the stage 1 debate was that of the delay that might be caused by a death being reviewed, which could be extremely distressing for cultural and religious reasons.

The minister said that she would look at having test sites to see how the policy would work, and she suggested Glasgow as a possible test site for dealing with issues regarding faith groups.

I welcome that commitment, but I ask that another of the test sites be in one of our island authority areas, where the local culture is that the body would normally remain at home prior to the funeral. That would enable how the operational issues could be dealt with in those areas to be looked into.

Given the timing of the bill and of the setting up of the pilots, it might not be possible to test the proposed system in the winter months, so I ask the minister to ensure that the people who work in the test site areas look at the implications of poor weather and possible transport disruption.

Last weekend, I had an interesting experience travelling to Shetland, which took quite a while longer than I expected and included an overnight stay in Kirkwall in Orkney, as well as a visit to Aberdeen. That is frustrating enough for people who have plans, but it could be extremely distressing for a bereaved family that was waiting for a medical examiner to pitch up, as it could delay the making of funeral arrangements.

The possibility of such delays might lead to a requirement for refrigerated mortuaries on our islands and in our remote communities, and that would come with an additional cost.

Winter conditions are challenging for obvious reasons, but ferries and planes can also be affected during the summer months, when it can be difficult to get on and off islands because of tourist travel. In that period, it is often difficult to book a ferry or a plane ticket.

We must ensure that the policy works in practice, otherwise it will lead to distress and possibly to additional costs for authorities that attempt to implement the bill.

We must also ensure that our remote, rural and island communities receive a service and safeguards that are equivalent to those that more urban areas receive.

A process needs to be put in place that will deal with all those issues and deliver the same protection for all our communities.

The bill is technical, but it is important nonetheless, and we need to ensure that the system that it puts in place is right so that we can protect the people whom we seek to serve.


 

  Share This Page