If my children’s lives were on the line as the result of an act of cowardice and desertion by one of their colleagues, or if that colleague put their lives at risk with a harmful action, they ought to suffer the full consequences of the law. It is not for me to judge whether they should receive a life sentence or two, five or 10 years’ imprisonment—that is for the system to decide.
The hon. Member for Newark spoke about commanding the largest battalion in the country of more than 900 soldiers for two and a half years on two active service deployments. One soldier could have faced court martial for something that could be construed as desertion. If we were on the receiving end when someone deserted their post, and if their action took our lives or the lives of our comrades, would we honestly not expect anything more than a slap on the wrist or a two-year sentence for an individual who chose to disregard their responsibilities to the unit, let alone their responsibilities to the country?
The Bill gets it right. Parliament should not allow any ambiguity in the way in which members of the armed forces can interpret their responsibilities, as that would be manifestly unfair to the men and women who daily put their lives on the line. It would be unfair to suggest that they can pick and choose, as they cannot do so. The hon. Member for Newark explained with a great deal of eloquence how the unit would dispense its own version of fair and just punishment if a colleague acted in such a way. I do not wish to suggest for a minute that that is correct, as military justice should be seen to be fair and should be administered properly.
Members of the armed forces should not be left in any doubt about the consequences of their actions. A sentence that may be for life is exactly that. Every court in the land has discretion in the determination of most sentences. I was concerned about the sentences meted out today to the three men who killed the young black lad in Birmingham last year. The judge recommended 25 years, but I am sure that if I was the parent of that young boy, 25 years would not be anything like long enough. We must judge these things on what we would expect if our sons and daughters were put in harm’s way. We must ensure justice for them as much as for anyone else.
Armed Forces Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Mike Hancock
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 22 May 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Armed Forces Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c1229 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:08:02 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325673
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325673
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_325673