UK Parliament / Open data

Armed Forces Bill

Proceeding contribution from Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 22 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills on Armed Forces Bill.
I welcome the Minister to his new role. I think that, given his performance today, he will be a formidable addition to the defence team. I also welcome the process by which the Bill was examined. We went through reams of written evidence in the Select Committee, and also had an opportunity to examine witnesses. For me, however, one of the most important parts of the process was the Committee’s visit to Cyprus, Oman and Iraq, where we were able to speak to the guys and girls on the ground who would be influenced by and subject to the Bill. We ask our armed forces to operate in dangerous places and we ask them to put their lives at risk, so it is obvious that they must obey orders from their commanding officers. It emerged clearly today that we cannot allow people to operate like maverick loners. I think that the best way to prevent that is to foster team work, and to make a joint commitment to a common goal. Team work is much more likely to be generated by trust, transparency and openness than by operation as a secret closed group. Two issues became very clear to me as we debated the Bill. One was the removal of the power of the commanding officer to discuss a case, which has been much debated this evening. It was also discussed extensively with serving personnel during our visits. I do not accept that it damages the chain of command; I think that it enhances the reputation of our armed services. It represents a willingness not just to ensure that serious cases are investigated properly but to ensure that they are seen to be investigated properly, so that our armed services are held in the high esteem that we know they deserve, not just in this country but on the world stage. The second issue is the duty of care and redress of complaints, mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble). We want our young people to choose the armed services as a valued career path where their capabilities will be stretched and their mettle will be tested, but where there is also a duty of care and an open and transparent redress procedure. I represent a city with a long and proud history of its sons and daughters going to sea to defend our shores in armed service. I have a vested interest in ensuring the safety and security of my constituency, which in the past has been a military target, and in ensuring that my country is protected by an effective and professional armed service. However, I also have an interest in ensuring that individual serving soldiers, sailors and airmen are protected by a duty of care, and that potential recruits are not deterred by the perception of a bullying culture or complaints hidden under the carpet. Despite the omission of an independent commissioner, which I hope will be discussed again when the Bill goes to another place, I believe that the Bill brings service discipline up to date. It reflects the modern world—the very different threats that face us and our armed services and the highly visible theatre in which they now operate, with ““embedded”” journalists and images posted on websites and television stations. I am grateful for the opportunity to participate in the Bill’s progress, and I hope that every Member will support it this evening. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
446 c1299-300 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top