It is of course of great benefit to the House, as my hon. Friend points out.
It would be helpful if the Minister would indicate whether any consideration has been given to the likely costs. As this is a money resolution, and as the Bill has implications for additional expenditure by the Department in the establishment of standing courts martial, and there is the possibility of increased litigation that might entail increased costs for the legal representation of members of the armed forces who end up in the dock, I wonder whether the Minister can give us any estimate today of the likely increases in the defence budget that might arise. That would be helpful, but if he cannot give us that information today, we quite understand that a letter may follow, as has been his custom on other occasions.
We welcome the fact that the motion will facilitate further debate, and I look forward to joining the Minister in resisting a grievance procedure that would not be appropriate for Her Majesty’s armed forces. I am delighted that in the spirit of co-operation between both sides of the House in areas on which we agree, I shall be able to make the Minister’s task that much easier and perhaps make common cause against some of his Back Benchers, which may be developing into a bit of a habit—
Armed Forces Bill [Money]
Proceeding contribution from
Gerald Howarth
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 21 March 2006.
It occurred during Legislative debate on Armed Forces Bill [Money].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c176 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:58:37 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310644
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310644
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_310644