Local Authorities Cemeteries (Amendment) Order 1986 (Hansard, 8 October 1986)

§ Baroness Hooper
rose to move, That the order laid before the House on 2nd July be approved. [29th Report from the Joint Committee.]
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I beg to move that the Local Authorities Cemeteries (Amendment) Order 1986, laid before the House on 2nd July, be approved. This is a minor order with a simple purpose. It will provide that burial authorities may, if they choose, keep burial records on a computer.
It is now over nine years since the House debated and approved an order providing a comprehensive management code for local authority cemeteries. With the passage of time, Article 11 of that order—the Local Authority Cemeteries Order 1977—has become unduly restrictive. It requires that particulars of local authority burials must be recorded by hand. They must be entered in ink in register books, and signed. New technologies have not therefore been applied in this area of record keeping.
The draft order now before the House amends Article 11. It will provide the option—and it is no more than that—for local authorities to computerise burial records. Certified documents produced by a computer retaining such records will be deemed to be copies of an entry in the burial register.
The proposal for an amending order was put to the Government by the burial authorities themselves. The authorities felt that, in appropriate circumstances, the changeover from manual to computerised registration would lead to savings in staff time and storage space. This would particularly be the case for the larger authorities with higher numbers of burials and computer facilities already available. In addition, improvements could be made to the service for users. This could be achieved without detriment to the extent or legibility of the details recorded. Most importantly, however, the authorities felt the proposed change would not in any way undermine their special duty of care towards relatives of the deceased. Before reaching a final view on the proposed change the Government consulted some 22 organisations, including the local authority associations, funerary interests, church bodies and relevant trade unions. No major objections were raised.
In summary, this order deals solely with cemeteries provided by local authorities. It provides a discretion for authorities to take advantage of modern techniques of record keeping. It does, however, leave the discretion whether to adopt new methods where it properly belongs—at the local level. I commend the order to the House.
Moved, that the order laid before the House on 2nd July be approved. [29th Report from the Joint Committee]—(Baroness Hooper.)

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, we are grateful to the noble Baroness for her explanation of the order and we welcome it. However, there is just one small question which I should like to ask and also one small reservation; that is, that the value of permanent records of burial over the years is undoubted. People require them for all kinds of reasons. We would like to be reassured that where an authority decides to go over to computerised records there will still be a permanent record available.
My understanding is that computer tapes degrade after a particular length of time—10 years perhaps, or 12. It seems to me that it would be a pity, if not an inconvenience, if permanent records were not kept. Is there therefore any intention on the part of the Government to see that where a computer system is entirely taken up there shall be some permanent record still made? A computer print-out would suffice. but the order as it stands does not require that this shall be done.
With that single reservation we welcome the order and I hope the noble Baroness can give a satisfactory answer.

§ Baroness Hooper
Yes, my Lords, it is intended that the public should have acccess to these records. Most authorities already permit searches and perhaps make minor charges in this respect. The availability of printouts therefore, which it would be possible for the relatives of the deceased to keep, would be met in the circumstances. I think that the noble Baroness can be reassured that access to the records will be available and that the ability to take a record from those computerised records will also be a possibility.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, by leave of the House, I welcome the explanation but it does not quite meet my point. I wonder whether permanent records will be made as a matter of course, because it is not simply the point of the immediate relatives at that time requiring a permanent record, but at some time in the future researchers or distant relatives, perhaps from abroad, may need to have access to the records. Will they exist in a permanent form? Computer records are not necessarily permanent unless they are printed out as a matter of course.

Lord Winstanley
My Lords, to add to the point made by the noble Baroness, what one is concerned about is the durability of the records to which she has referred. I, for purely personal purposes, have been inquiring recently into burial records dating back to 1602. Were we to have to wait for hundreds of years and then be told that we could have a computer printout, I venture to suggest it might not be satisfactory if and when we got it.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, I am not sure that I have the exact response, but, were this a question of security of records, the copying of magnetic tapes or discs is normally standard procedure for computer installations so that the records may be created, for example, in the event of accident or destruction by fire, as well as because of deterioration. Nevertheless, precautions will be taken, such as copies being kept in fireproof safes or at other sites. As I have said, it is 297 probable that authorities will keep copies of the register in print-out form, and Article 12 of the 1977 order directs that records shall be stored so as to preserve them from loss or damage, which must include deterioration. However, I have taken the points made by the noble Baroness and by the noble Lord, and obviously these will be borne in mind in putting the order into practice.
On Question. Motion agreed to.

§ Baroness Hooper
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do adjourn during pleasure until 8.10 p.m.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.