Armed Forces Bill

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that intervention. I totally agree with what he has said. Lord Boyce and others need either to shut up or to come up with actual facts. They are in danger of perpetuating myths not just in newspapers but to front-line servicemen, who think that there is some constraint there when there is not. I have first-hand experience of talking to soldiers in Iraq where that mythology is seeping through. If that is what Lord Boyce and others are doing, they are doing modern-day servicemen a great disservice. The hon. Member for Canterbury said that the commanding officer’s right to dismiss a charge was an ancient protection and a legal safeguard. I am sorry, but I do not see it as either. I think that the clause will strengthen the role of the commanding officer. Commanding officers can already, if they wish, bring in the police to investigate and take advice on cases. I spoke to service police during the Select Committee’s visit to Cyprus. They rightly made the point that early investigation and collection of the facts lead to less delay in ensuring that frivolous and vexatious cases do not go any further—although I accept that, in Iraq, people are dealing with situations that are very different from incidents in a barracks here, in Germany or in Cyprus. However, I think that the clause will strengthen the role of the commanding officer in being able to draw upon the expertise of service police to ensure that the facts are kept together very early on. One of the reasons that we will never get to the bottom of what actually happened at Deepcut and those four deaths is that vital evidence was not preserved at an early stage to allow the real truth to come out.