This is a typically weasel-worded apology by the anonymous 'spokesperson' for the Attorney-General, and an inadequate explanation for the over four years delay in granting the requested fiat to the Senior Coroner.
The apology is weasel-worded (as are so many apologies by politicians and government officials) since it only expresses sorrow for the 'impact' the delay has had on the deceased's family and friends. There is no apology for the gross failure of administration.
The statement ascribes the delay to an "administrative error", but such errors do not occur in a vacuum. One or more individuals in the A-G's office must have been responsible for the error - whether in failing to monitor the application or effectively to supervise the junior civil servant who was, and successive A-G's in the last administration must also bear responsibility for such oversight failure. The ineffective process for handling fiat applications (now claimed to have been changed) can only have been initiated by a human individual, so who is that person, and what disciplinary action will now be taken against him or her?
The statement says that "the way the attorney general’s office handles applications for fiat has changed significantly in the time since and we continue to monitor our processes so delays don’t happen again." So, what has changed - and who is monitoring the processes (and how and with what frequency) to ensure that unacceptable delays to not occur again?
This dreadful delay has caused terrible suffering to the family who want answers to the question of how their beloved son was not stopped from killing himself. It's shocking that Braverman allowed this delay to happen, caused this delay in fact. This is why lawyers should stick to law and not indulge their political ambitions unless they cease to practice law.
This is a typically weasel-worded apology by the anonymous 'spokesperson' for the Attorney-General, and an inadequate explanation for the over four years delay in granting the requested fiat to the Senior Coroner.
The apology is weasel-worded (as are so many apologies by politicians and government officials) since it only expresses sorrow for the 'impact' the delay has had on the deceased's family and friends. There is no apology for the gross failure of administration.
The statement ascribes the delay to an "administrative error", but such errors do not occur in a vacuum. One or more individuals in the A-G's office must have been responsible for the error - whether in failing to monitor the application or effectively to supervise the junior civil servant who was, and successive A-G's in the last administration must also bear responsibility for such oversight failure. The ineffective process for handling fiat applications (now claimed to have been changed) can only have been initiated by a human individual, so who is that person, and what disciplinary action will now be taken against him or her?
The statement says that "the way the attorney general’s office handles applications for fiat has changed significantly in the time since and we continue to monitor our processes so delays don’t happen again." So, what has changed - and who is monitoring the processes (and how and with what frequency) to ensure that unacceptable delays to not occur again?
All good questions. I’d be happy to publish a further reply from the attorney general’s office if one is received.
This dreadful delay has caused terrible suffering to the family who want answers to the question of how their beloved son was not stopped from killing himself. It's shocking that Braverman allowed this delay to happen, caused this delay in fact. This is why lawyers should stick to law and not indulge their political ambitions unless they cease to practice law.
As to what Joshua supports as a seemingly sensible amendment, do I hear,”when Parliamentary time allows”?