Armed Forces Bill

I cannot imagine any set of circumstances in which a soldier, or any other service personnel member, was accused of discharging a weapon in such a way that somebody was killed or injured that would not involve the commanding officer, who could not be left out of the loop in the initial investigations that would have to take place. The problem in Iraq is that there are insufficient military policemen to be able to help our service personnel to perform some of their duties. People who have been there recently, including some of our colleagues in this House, will tell us that. The hon. Member for Newark (Patrick Mercer) was good enough to recognise that until 1970, the situation was governed by a different style of soldiering and chain of command. Ireland changed that because of the type of confrontation that was faced daily by our armed forces over those 30-odd years. There were always going to be very difficult circumstances when weapons were fired, people were killed and soldiers were prosecuted through the civilian courts or action was taken through the military courts. Ireland was never going to be an easy situation. The Bill provides a much clearer definition of the way in which these matters will be resolved. I believe that clause 116 is helpful. There was a situation in my constituency that involved naval personnel and civilian personnel working for the Navy who were all, to one degree or another, charged with offences relating to child pornography. The civilian was punished quite severely, while the service personnel were dealt with through the chain of command and virtually got away with a warning, in respect of almost identical crimes. That case has gone to the desk of the Minister, because, rightly, the civilian involved felt that he had been treated differently. I am not wedded to the idea that the chain of command is always right. It does not end with the Chief of the Defence Staff. There is a chain of command above that—the political bosses at the MOD, under whichever party, who set the parameters. The Bill is not driven by the views of the Chief of the Defence Staff, but by the need to reform armed forces legislation to bring it into the 21st century and to deal with the way in which service personnel should expect to be dealt with. The chain of command is by no means perfect, as the hon. Member for Newark was generous enough to admit. It cannot be right for us to say that we are wedded to it under any circumstances. If any individual in our armed forces has a serious allegation under schedule 2 being pursued against them, there is a duty and a responsibility for that to go further, and for it not to remain in-house and within the command structure. Anything short of that would enhance the public’s perception of the armed forces being treated differently, and that cannot and should not be the case. This is about is having a level playing field so that everyone clearly understands that if they are investigated for a schedule 2 offence, it will not stay in-house but will go straight to the civilian authorities or to the Crown Prosecution Service.