Debate contribution: Statutory Duty of Candour

Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on 11 November 2024.

MLA

Mr Colin McGrath

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

11 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Statutory Duty of Candour

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4667841

Read the official Assembly record

Text

In addressing the motion, I will set out the fact that the SDLP has always stood alongside the families who were impacted, be that by Dr Watt or the scandals at Muckamore Abbey Hospital, and alongside those impacted by hyponatraemia or other cases. The families fell victim to a litany of failures by those who were charged with their care and health. They deserved better, and many still deserve justice. I have met many of those families, and the justice that they deserve goes beyond prosecuting those responsible to changing the culture in our health system so that those who witness failings feel that they can speak truth to power. That culture is, sadly, not there at present. Unfortunately, the motion might not help with that change in culture; in some ways, it might inhibit it. The proposers suggest a process in which there is an individual duty of candour, an organisational duty of candour, criminal sanctions for all and then roll those all together. That could just lead us to poor policy. We have met doctors through the British Medical Association (BMA). We have met nurses through the RCN, and we have met UNISON, the largest union, about the motion. I would be surprised if, when developing the motion, the proposers had not also engaged with those unions, which represent tens of thousands of workers. If you had, which, I am sure, you have, as we did, you would have heard them ask, "Where does the proposed duty of candour begin and end? What do you mean by 'legally enforceable'? Are you aware that the unintended consequences of what is being proposed would push our statutory duty beyond the rest of the UK?".

Yes, because I would appreciate the extra minute.

Absolutely: I could not agree more with you. You are now in that Executive, so I look forward to your being part of the Executive and part of the decision-making to ensure that that happens. I am an Opposition spokesperson: I cannot deliver that. You are in the Executive, and it is up to you to deliver that. I want to know why we are pushing for criminal sanctions, when, three years ago, an expert-led consultation said that we could not get agreement on that.

If I must. You got plenty of time, but I am happy to debate.

Alliance do not like it when you disagree with them on a few things. I agree with you on many of these things, but when we do not fully agree with the Alliance Party, they like to lecture us. I am happy enough to continue, because it is not my intention to completely disagree with all of it. It is about the way that the motion is phrased and worded. We acknowledge the intention of Sinn Féin's amendment, because any new system should be co-designed and co-produced with workers and the families that are affected. However, I fear that it is still predicated on the basis that there is an individual, criminally sanctionable duty of candour, which might be a bit concerning.

Of course I will.

I thank the Member for the intervention. I agree, but if we are going to end up with a criminally sanctionable individual duty of candour, that is not an outcome that those hard-working health staff want, and it is not one that we could support.

I am being attacked from all sides of the Chamber. I only have six or seven minutes. Go on ahead, because yours will be the most interesting intervention that I am about to get.

I am sorry: I did not hear that.

We absolutely do, but what I am saying is that this motion, as proposed, which has everything lumped in and is non-binding, is not going to achieve that. What we need to see is legislation being presented in the Assembly. That is what we are supposed to be doing. We need to legislate so that we can work for the families and help those who have been impacted on. We need to legislate so that we can create a culture in our health service that will work and allow people to feel that they can step up and detail any of the problems and concerns that they have. Once again, however, what we have here is a talking shop, with no action at the end of it. If we are going to continue with talking shops, we will see no change in anything.

747 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:35 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification