Jump to content
  • House of Commons Debate – Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry (31 January 2023)


    Mark Hughes
    • UK
    • Reports and articles
    • Pre-existing
    • Public domain
    • No
    • House of Commons
    • 31/01/23
    • Everyone

    Summary

    This is a brief summary of a Westminster Hall debate in the House of Commons on the 31 January 2023 concerning the Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry.

    Content

    What is a Westminster Hall debate?

    Westminster Hall debates give Members of Parliament (MPs) an opportunity to raise local or national issues and receive a response from a government minister. Any MP can take part in a Westminster Hall debate.

    Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry

    Vicky Ford MP opened this debate by raising concerns about the Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry. This centred on a recent open letter from the inquiry's Chair, Dr Geraldine Strathdee, who stated that as a non-statutory inquiry she felt they would be unable to fulfil their terms of reference, due to extremely low engagement from staff at Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust. She had highlighted that, of the 14,000 members of staff whom the inquiry had written to, only 11 had agreed to give evidence.

    In the debate it was noted that Vicky Ford MP, Sir James Duddridge MP, Priti Patel MP and Sir John Whittingdale MP were now all calling for the Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry to be converted into a full statutory inquiry, which will compel witnesses to give evidence, to ensure full transparency and greater public scrutiny of its progress.

    This debate was responded to on behalf of the Government by Neil O’Brien MP, Minister for Primary Care and Public Health. He noted that the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care had recently met with Paul Scott, Chief Executive of Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, to ask about the actions the Trust is taking to encourage staff engagement with the inquiry and to seek assurance that the Trust will provide all the evidence and information requested by the inquiry. Regarding the potential of converting this into a statutory inquiry, he stated that:

    “Our view is that a non-statutory inquiry, if it is possible, remains the most effective way to get to the truth of what happens. It is quicker, and potentially involves not having to drag clinicians through the public processes of a statutory inquiry. When my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham was Home Secretary, she used the non-statutory process to protect those who did not want to be named and dragged through a statutory process. It is faster and more flexible, which is why it was chosen in the first place.

    Although statutory inquiries can compel witnesses to give evidence under oath, that does not necessarily mean that it will be easier to obtain the evidence we want. However, all that turns on people co-operating with a non-statutory inquiry, and we now need to see a quantum leap in the level of co-operation. We will not hesitate to move to a statutory inquiry if we do not see a dramatic increase in the level of co-operation. Given how long this has gone on, we cannot wait for a long period for a transformation in the level of engagement. While the approach remains non-statutory for now, we will not hesitate to change that approach if we do not see the change we need rapidly.”

    House of Commons Debate – Essex Mental Health Independent Inquiry (31 January 2023) https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-01-31/debates/0D3EF056-6C44-46E5-A7C9-4371F5220914/EssexMentalHealthIndependentInquiry
    0 reactions so far

    0 Comments

    Recommended Comments

    There are no comments to display.

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...