Oral answer (Lords) on
Emergency Services: Ministers of Religion
Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to establish
a multi-professional strategy for the emergency services
concerning the attendance of ministers of religion at the scene
of situations involving serious injury.
The Minister of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, today of all days, we remember , who tragically died carrying
out his duties as a public servant. Our thoughts and prayers are
with his loved ones, as well as with all those involved in scenes
of traumatic injury. Decisions regarding the management of such
situations remain an operational issue for the emergency services
involved. There are no plans to establish a multi-professional
strategy on this issue.
(Con)
My Lords, the tragic death of brought to national attention a
problem that experts and academics in the field of disaster and
emergency response have recognised for some time—namely, the lack
of a considered approach to the role of ministers of religion and
their access to victims at end-of-life in disasters and
emergencies. While I welcome the fact that the Archbishop of
Westminster and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner have opened
a dialogue on this topic, does my noble friend agree that a
national standard is required? Will she undertake a study,
preliminary to that, of other jurisdictions such as Israel, Italy
and even Northern Ireland, where practice tends to be more
nuanced and accommodating?
(Con)
There are certainly lessons to be learned from other
jurisdictions, as my noble friend said. I totally empathise with
the situation that both David Amess’s family and the police found
themselves in during that dreadful incident. Given the people who
are involved, I hope and expect a sensible and pragmatic
conclusion to be arrived at through the discussions.
(Lab)
My Lords, the noble Lord has spoken with compassion, but is there
not a danger that the attendance of ministers of religion at the
scene of an accident could hamper the work of the emergency
services? If there are serious injuries, the victim will be taken
to hospital, where they can, if desired, call on the excellent
chaplaincy service, which works 24 hours a day.
(Con)
The noble Lord is right that chaplains operate 24 hours a day in
hospitals. My noble friend’s question, of course, was about
, who was at the point of death
when his family wanted him to have the last rites from a Catholic
priest. The noble Lord, Lord Anderson, is correct to point out
that the criteria for the police to consider in such incidents
are protection of life, the risks at the scene and the
preservation of evidence at the scene.
The Lord
My Lords, I greatly welcome the joint study group announced by
the cardinal archbishop. Does the Minister agree that good
outcomes from that study would include both further training and
education to ensure that police officers understand the
significance of spiritual comfort at the point of death, for the
dying of whatever faith, and an increased role for police
chaplaincy?
(Con)
I am sure that what will come out of that group are
considerations of whether any changes are required to the
guidance issued to police officers faced with such situations. I
know that hospital chaplains are available around the clock to
cater for a range of different needs and provide comfort, both
during a period of illness and at the point of death.
(Con)
My Lords, the circumstances surrounding access for the local
priest to be with Sir David in his final hours put everyone
concerned in an exceptionally difficult position. Will my noble
friend the Minister look at the US model, where emergency
managers can identify and engage with faith-based groups in
emergency preparedness activities, building partnerships with
them to establish protocols for use at the scene of serious
injuries and integrating faith leaders into emergency situations
involving serious injury?
(Con)
I will certainly take my noble friend’s point back. I know the
College of Policing welcomes engagement with faith community
leaders and others who have concerns about the current authorised
professional practice to understand views and consider possible
next steps for this issue.
(LD)
My Lords, surely there is a difference between the perpetrator
sitting at the scene of a stabbing waiting to be arrested and an
explosion where forensic recovery is essential. Can the Minister
not bring together faith and police leaders nationally to discuss
the potential use of discretion, in appropriate cases?
(Con)
The noble Lord is right, in the sense that it sounds like the
perpetrator was standing there, waiting to be arrested, but there
has to be a framework around these things. Of course, forensic
preservation is crucial at such scenes, even where it is apparent
what has gone on. I am sure that the group will consider the
noble Lord’s proposals.
(Con)
My Lords, I know this is incredibly difficult but, as we can
carry donor cards and things, would it not be possible to
consider compiling a register of those of us who would wish to
receive the last rites at the point of death? I am sure that
would bring great comfort to many families.
(Con)
We are talking here about the point of death of someone who was
killed in very unusual circumstances. My family know what I would
want, and I am sure noble Lords in this House have let their
families know what they would want. But there is a point there
about pragmatism and considering someone’s last wishes at the
scene of crime.
(CB)
My Lords, in these difficult times, is it not possible that
people’s spiritual needs, as well as their physical needs, could
be supported, and if possible adhered to, during serious injury
and illness? Could the Home Office and the Department of Health
and Social Care work together to send out a directive advising on
these matters?
(Con)
The group led by the National Police Chiefs’ Council, joined by
the Catholic Church and the College of Policing, will determine
what such a framework looks like. It was a surprise to me that
this had not come up before, and therefore it needs some thinking
about, including on whether changes are required to the guidance
issued to police faced with such situations.
(Lab)
Our thoughts too are very much with the family and friends of
, particularly today. As has
been said, Cardinal Vincent Nichols and the Metropolitan Police
Commissioner have agreed to create a group reviewing last rites
access for priests at crime scenes. Presumably, there is a need
to ensure that a crime scene remains protected and not disturbed,
and that the person seeking access is who they say they are.
First, has this matter of access or lack of it for ministers of
religion been a concern before and, if so, with representatives
of which faiths? Secondly, is the question of such access
presently covered by College of Policing or other guidelines?
(Con)
It does not seem to have come up as an issue before, and that is
precisely why this group is meeting to see if there are any gaps
in the guidance issued to police to deal with such incidents.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, one of the cruellest aspects of the lockdown was the
denial of visits from priests to give last rites to those dying
in care homes. For Catholics, at least, that was as awful as not
seeing beloved family. The official advice was to say prayers by
Zoom. Would the noble Baroness note that, while there is an Amess
amendment as part of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts
Bill, this is less a regulatory or legislative matter and more a
deficit of cultural capital when it comes to Christian practices?
Would she also note that the overtechnocratic approach
illustrated by some of the replies today misses what really
matters in society?
(Con)
Not only do I empathise with what really matters to some people
at the point of death—it made me think that, if I was in such a
situation, I would want a priest there—but I am very glad that
Cardinal Nichols is meeting with the NPCC. That group will
consider a more nuanced approach that can be reflected in police
guidance about facing such a situation.
Extract from Committee
stage (Lords) of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts
Bill
(Con):...I am treading on
slightly uncertain ground for me here, but if you go to other
countries—to Israel, for example—I am told that where there are
bombs and emergency responses, there are people who are again
embedded with the police. They would not be clergy because
Judaism operates in a different way; there is no function, as I
understand it, reserved to a clergyman in Judaism that cannot be
carried out by a lay person. Although the approach to death is
slightly different—it is not a question of last rites for the
dying, but more a case of the proper treatment of the dead—these
people are embedded with the police and it is all well
understood. My noble friend , asking a supplementary
question earlier today, drew attention to practice in certain US
states. Again, there is much better relationship, a working
relationship, between the police and what are called faith
groups, in exactly these circumstances...
