Burials and Cremations (Hansard, 13 April 2000)

§ Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle)
I am delighted to have been granted this debate, especially as the Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, South (Mr. Boateng), will reply. I understand that he has cancelled an overseas visit to reply—or so one of his ministerial colleagues told me.
The matter is serious. Some people may feel that the debate should have taken place in January when we had major problems with funeral delays, but I have waited nine weeks to get it. It would have been more relevant then, but I want to try to ensure that we never again have the problems that we experienced this January.
I ask my right hon. Friend to cast his mind back to January, when we had a flu epidemic. We saw vivid pictures on television—hospital morgues were full and refrigerated vehicles had to be put in hospital car parks to store the bodies because they could not be buried directly and on time.
At the time, the view was that it was a national health service problem. The reality is that the NHS was left with the problem and the cause lies elsewhere. During this debate, I shall discuss what went wrong and how, perhaps, this Parliament and the Government can help to put it right.
There is no doubt that the way in which we dealt with the problem varied during the flu outbreak in January. In some parts of Essex, for example, bereaved relatives had to wait more than two weeks to bury their loved ones. In one area, cremations were delayed by more than a month, although the customary wait was four or five days.
That sort of delay has awful consequences. In one family, an elderly lady died and her daughter flew in from America to be told that the burial could not take place for two weeks. She returned to the United States, but shortly afterwards her father died. She flew back to this country and was told that the burial could not take place for nearly a month. Again, she had to return home to America and miss the funeral. On top of the sadness of bereavement, people had the trauma of being unable to attend the funeral.
In this country, a funeral is a great tradition. It is a watershed in the grieving process. After the funeral we continue to grieve, but we try to put our lives back together. That is not possible if one has to wait a month for the funeral. In many areas, one finishes work when a close family member dies and one does not return until after the funeral. That cannot happen if the funeral takes place a month after the death. People are left in emotional limbo.
I am not raising this matter because I have a problem in my constituency—quite the reverse. Carlisle has an excellent burial and bereavement service. I pay special tribute to Mr. Ken West, the bereavement service manager of the city council, and his staff for the dedicated way in which they not only ensure that the services are efficient, but work towards improving them and making sure that the bereaved are consulted as well as comforted. The standard in Carlisle is very high—only this week it received national recognition. I congratulate the staff and Mr. Ken West.
597 It is not as though the fact that there are more deaths in the winter than in the summer is any surprise. I have statistics on mortality from the House of Commons Library from 1841 to 1997—more than 150 years. The common factor is that during the winter months, between January and March, there is a 20, 25 or 30 per cent. increase in the number of deaths in this country compared with the summer quarter. We have always known that, but now we have statistics going back 150 years showing it to be the case. So why are we so ill prepared?
I would like to discuss what I believe to be the main reasons for delays in funeral services and for the differing standards throughout the country. The main cause for concern is that there is no industry standard for bereavement services or funeral delays. For example, this winter there were delays of up to four weeks in Romford. I understand that in Shrewsbury, in the winter, it is not unusual to have delays in excess of two weeks. In Carlisle, the maximum delay was eight days. That was during the flu epidemic; it was nothing to do with any problems with the burial service, but with the fact that the funeral directors could not cope.
There are variations. There are no Government targets. This is a very sensitive issue, and I believe that people expect the Government to set a standard. I hope that their best value policy will change the situation. That is assuming that the Audit Commission sees waiting times as a performance indicator which should be met by all local authorities.
At present, there is only one industry standard. The voluntary charter of bereavement was written by Mr. Ken West, the Carlisle bereavement manager, in 1997 for the Institute of Burial and Cremation Administration. It is a very interesting document, which gives performance targets. It says that charter members should specify maximum funeral waiting times and develop strategies for handling high death rates. Not only do charter members have a target, they know how to cope with the winter problems. Unfortunately, this is a voluntary code. There are only 30 or so charter members, which leaves more than 200 local authorities without a common standard, or any standard at all.
I come now to other factors. I do not think that people should be expected to work on bank holidays at Christmas and the new year, but that means a backlog of funerals in January. I see no reason why Christmas eve, for example, could not be a normal day for funerals, or why the hours during which funerals are held could not be extended in the period between Christmas and new year.
Finance is not the problem. Crematoriums are public facilities, but they are often very profitable. However, local authorities seem more keen on taking the money than on paying for extended days, more staff or overtime. That matter needs to be looked at seriously. Problems also arise with death certificates, post mortems and cremation certificates. Funeral directors cannot arrange a funeral until a death certificate or cremation certificate has been issued. Delays are often caused when doctors do not sign those certificates. The cremation certificate is not provided by the national health service. In fact, it costs £70 to get that certificate signed. It is up to the British Medical Association to ensure that there is adequate cover on hand to prevent delays in signing.
598 Facilities also need to be considered. Sometimes the people performing a cremation are very inefficient. In crematoriums with two chapels, both could be used at the same time. However, pressure of numbers sometimes causes cremators to reduce the length of funeral services. That cannot be right. People are entitled to a dignified funeral, and it is wrong to squeeze a service into 20 minutes because of pressure of numbers. We should look to increase the number of chapels available for such services.
The big problem is one of inflexibility. We have been doing things in certain ways for years. Local authorities do not really pay attention to cremations and funerals—I doubt that many councillors get telephoned with complaints about delays in funerals. People ring them because their bins have not been emptied, but not about funerals. Local authorities should think about that problem.
The private sector has moved in and built various facilities. In Bristol, for example, the waiting time for funerals has been reduced. However, local authorities still fear that that will cost them money. Planning obstructions seem to be put in the way of the construction of private facilities, so they cannot set up in competition with the public facilities and local authorities do not lose the income from funerals and cremations.
The National Association of Funeral Directors wrote to me on this matter giving reasons for the delays that have been suffered. First, it said that the extended Christmas holiday period—when there were an extra three or four days off—led to delays of up to four weeks. I accept that delays were caused, but they were not of four weeks. Secondly, the association said that doctors were not available to sign death certificates and that there was a backlog in the coroner's court. That deserves attention. Thirdly, it mentioned the increased incidence of deaths caused by the flu epidemic, and I accept that that happened. Finally, it said that the flu virus took a toll among people working in the cemeteries, and that problems arose when they took time off for illness. However, the association noted that crematoriums did not extend their hours of operation to allow more time for funerals to take place. The association's chief executive officer, Mr. Alan Slater, said that the delays were not the responsibility of the association, and I have to accept that.
In the past, there has been a cosy relationship between the association's members and local authorities. Everyone likes an easy day, working from 9 am to 4 pm, Monday to Friday, but the association's members know that their business will not disappear. They hold the monopoly in the market and, in their view, a funeral that is delayed can be slotted in later. I think that, in the main, local authorities were at fault for funeral delays this winter.
It would seem that the National Association of Funeral Directors has a problem with charging. Charges have increased for funerals throughout the country by about 25 per cent. in the past two years. It has been suggested that that is because major companies are moving in, taking over the old, traditional family businesses, exploiting the situation and increasing prices. I do not want to go into that today, but it may be something for the Competition Commission to examine in future.
Instead, I shall suggest where the Government fit into the issue. They seem not to have a role or to take a role. My right hon. Friend is a Home Office Minister who deals, of course, with Home Office legislation. There are, 599 of course, Ministers who deal with the health aspects, the consumer problems and the social fund implications of funerals. We need to have a Government who are more proactive in this area who will set high standards for the service throughout the country. I would welcome an in-depth assessment of the industry by the Audit Commission and the setting of national benchmarks by which all authorities could be judged.
The voluntary charter for bereavement could form the basis of a policy that would be developed to ensure that no matter where someone lives, or more importantly where he dies, there will be a quality of service of which that person and the bereaved can be assured. Best practice would thereby be assured.
I hope that the Government will consider these matters. They have been told that there is a problem, and I look forward to my right hon. Friend's response. Perhaps I might meet him soon, or one of his colleagues, to consider how we might make progress. We cannot allow the same problem to confront us next year. If that happens, the House and the Government must bear some of the responsibility.

§ The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Paul Boateng)
My hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Martlew) has raised an important concern, whose importance is not reflected in any way by the attendance in the Chamber. The issue goes to the welfare and concerns of the bereaved, who are at their most vulnerable when the funeral of a loved one is delayed. That can have a particularly damaging impact on their capacity to come to terms with their great and tragic loss.
As my hon. Friend said in a careful and thoughtful contribution, this is a complex matter—because of the number of Government Departments involved and because of the various stages and constituent parts that go to ensuring that a bereaved family can secure the burial or cremation of their loved one with due expedition.
I have listened keenly to my hon. Friend. We take seriously the issue of delay, and it is important to consider it in its wider perspective. Of course, as my hon. Friend will realise, many burials and cremations take place each year, and a comparatively small number of them are subject to delay. In fact, relatively few complaints are made; last year, the Home Office received one about a delay. Nevertheless, one complaint is one too many, and we accept that there are wider concerns. My hon. Friend has provided examples of such concerns, and each one of them is important and significant to the bereaved families involved. I am pleased that he has been able to raise this matter, because those families deserve assurances that the House pays careful attention to it and that the Government do all that they can to address the problems that arise.

§ Mr. Martlew
The fact that the Home Office has received only one complaint, when in January there were delays of more than four weeks, suggests not that the issue affects only a few people, but that people do not think that the Government have an input. Many people were affected this winter.

§ Mr. Boateng
My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. It is true that we must be cautious before we draw conclusions from the number of complaints that central 600 Government Departments receive. Members of the public may be correct in their perception that there is only a limited amount that the Government can do to deal with the problem, bearing in mind the number of agencies, organisations and authorities that have an input in determining whether there is a delay in any particular case. Nevertheless, all that can be done by Government given those limitations should be done, and we are determined to ensure that it is.
I shall refer to the history of this issue, which goes back to the origins of local government's and local communities' responsibility for funerals. Funeral services have always been provided by and on behalf of the local community. Until the beginning of the 19th century, responsibility for record keeping and provision of burial grounds lay with the Church. Now, once deaths have been registered by local registrars, funerals are organised by local funeral directors, using local municipal or private cremation and burial facilities. Local arrangements can understandably be far more responsive to the community's circumstances and needs.
It is perfectly true that no national standards have been set for the timeliness of funerals. Equally, there have never been national standards for the provision of burial or cremation facilities. Municipal authorities are empowered to provide cemeteries and crematoriums if they judge that it is appropriate to do so, but private undertakings will make their own assessment of the demands and the commercial risks. We have no evidence that, in the main, the arrangements work anything other than relatively well.
Charters are clearly significant. The Government, through their service first programme, have promoted the adoption of charters by all public services. Burial, cremation and other authorities are no exception. It is a matter for the relevant authorities to decide how to proceed with the work and what standards of service they can offer. They need to have regard, among other things, to the resources available to them.
The Government have not sought to set national standards for the burial and cremation industry pending their consideration of the standards promoted in two documents which have appeared in recent years: the charter for the bereaved, which was produced by the Institute for Burial and Cremation Administration, and the dead citizens charter which was produced by the National Funerals College. Neither document sets explicit standards for timeliness, although the National Funerals College encourages extended opening times for burial and cremation facilities. The college and the institute may want further to consider with their members whether such explicit standards should be set.
Nevertheless, seven local authority bereavement services in England and Wales achieved charter mark awards for the quality of their services in recent years; it is to be hoped that more such organisations will gain that standard. It is important that local bereavement services provide the most responsive service that they can to local people. It was interesting and encouraging to hear of my hon. Friend's experience in Carlisle on that matter.
On coroners and post mortems, it is important to realise that, sometimes, delays will be occasioned by the need for medico-legal investigation before the funeral can take place. Coroners are well aware of the effect of such delays, and of the importance that the Government attach 601 to the timely dispatch of business. Whenever possible, coroners try to release the bodies to the relatives as soon as possible after the conclusion of any necessary post mortem examination.
The model charter for the coroner service, launched last September, sets a target for the release of the body in most cases. Through that initiative, we are doing all that we can to encourage and support coroners to meet the highest standards. We are currently monitoring their progress on that matter and on the new procedures, introduced last year, to reduce delays when bodies are held pending serious criminal investigation. However, there is no room for complacency. We are not complacent about what needs to be done.
During the recent millennium period, we asked coroners about their arrangements. We suggested that they satisfy themselves that appropriate support services—from registrars, funeral directors and crematoriums and cemeteries—were in place. In the main, they achieved a relatively satisfactory standard.
However, lessons have been learned from their experience. We shall ensure that we build on that in the slightly different circumstances of the long holidays at Christmas and the new year in future. We are keen to explore ways of improving weekend and holiday provision of bereavement services. The Department of Health is currently examining the incidence of problems with a view to issuing appropriate guidance in due course.
My hon. Friend referred to the need for Government co-ordination. There is no one Minister or Department with responsibility for bereavement services in the 602 widest sense. Bearing in mind the wide range of services needed when a death occurs and during the weeks and months that follow, we need to ensure that, as far as is possible and appropriate, those services work in a way that is responsive to the Government's modernising initiative.
That initiative is committed to promoting improvements to public services in local government and in central Government. We have been examining the services required at a number of key stages in life, and how they can be made more accessible and intelligible to the public. That is part of the work of the bereavement service action team, which works with other organisations to find ways of improving the services provided for the bereaved.
As a result of the tragic incidents surrounding the murders committed by Dr. Harold Shipman, we have set up a review of death certification. That should assist in such matters.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising these important issues. I hope that he will not hesitate to send me details of cases on which he has specific concerns, so that they can be addressed. We must ensure that, as far as possible, wherever burial and cremation services are offered they meet the reasonable demands of the bereaved, and ease, rather than aggravate, their grief. By raising the matter tonight, my hon. Friend has undoubtedly assisted in that process; the House is grateful to him.