Key Facts

• Amendment 20 by Anna McMorrin seeks to require the Secretary of State to appoint an individual as an independent public advocate.
• Amendment 21 would change the definition of 'major incident' so that it automatically applies if a significant number of individuals are killed or seriously harmed, rather than being at the discretion of the Secretary of State.
• Lord Wills and others have criticized the current proposals for giving too much unfettered discretion to the Secretary of State.
• The statement references the Hillsborough disaster where cover-up by authorities led to trauma for survivors and families.
• Amendment 20 proposes removing the Secretary of State's discretion in appointing an advocate.
• There are other disasters mentioned like MV Derbyshire, Alder Hey organ scandal, and Manchester Arena bombing.
• The amendments focus on removing the Secretary of State's discretion to decide whether an event qualifies as a major incident for IPA appointment.
• Major incidents include events like Hillsborough, Grenfell Tower fire, and Manchester Arena bombing.
• The Government believes in maintaining flexibility by using 'may' instead of 'must' for appointing an IPA.
• Amendment 65 aims to add provisions requiring the Secretary of State to consider bereaved families' views when deciding on the appointment of an Independent Public Advocate.
• Amendment 66 ensures that the Secretary of State must consult victims before appointing a public advocate for a major incident.
• Clause 24 grants the Secretary of State discretion in appointing independent public advocates without current obligations to consider victim input.
• When Jack Straw became Home Secretary in 1997, he established the Stuart-Smith scrutiny following the drama-documentary “Hillsborough”.
• Lord Justice Stuart-Smith's initial comment was perceived as insensitive by the families of victims, leading to a loss of trust and credibility for his inquiry.
• Amendment 65 requires the Secretary of State to consider the views of bereaved families when deciding on the appointment of an independent public advocate.
• The amendments seek to give bereaved families agency over who is appointed as an advocate.
• The Minister acknowledges the need for trust and appropriate language in supporting victims after a disaster.
• Concerns are raised about potential delays in support reaching victims due to immediate consultations.
• Amendment 68 aims to define 'close family member'.
• The definition includes specific relatives like spouse, child, parent, sibling, cohabitant.
• It also specifies the executor of the deceased’s will as a close family member.
• Amendment 67 and 68 are probing amendments.
• Clause 24(7)(a) defines victims as individuals harmed by an incident.
• Clause 24(7)(b) includes close family members or friends of those who died or suffered serious harm.
• Clause 24 enables the Secretary of State to appoint independent public advocates for victims of major incidents.
• A 'major incident' includes an event causing death or serious harm to a significant number of individuals involving health and safety issues, regulatory failures, or events of serious concern.
• The advocate may be appointed when both requirements—one is the occurrence of a major incident in the advocate’s opinion, and two is that 50% plus one of those affected have requested an advocate—are met.
• New clause 15 sets out roles and functions for a public advocate.
• The role is intended to support victims of major incidents with efficient means of support.
• It would ensure reasonable costs, remuneration, and appropriate qualifications for the appointee.
• The MP supports a standing appointment over an ad hoc one.
• Bishop James Jones highlighted the importance of independence through a standing appointment.
• Lord Wills introduced a Bill in the Lords advocating for a standing independent public advocate.
• Maria Eagle calls for more ambitious measures to prevent cover-ups and ensure transparency from the start.
• Edward Argar acknowledges the new clause 15 proposed by Maria Eagle but maintains that a permanent IPA is not necessary due to the rarity of major incidents.
• The Minister believes it is right for the Secretary of State, accountable to Parliament, to decide on the deployment of an IPA.
• The Ministry of Justice has allocated funding for a permanent secretariat to support the IPA.
• Clause 25 provides for a secretariat and remuneration for the IPA's support system.
• Argar believes that defining major incidents broadly allows for flexibility in responding to various scenarios.