UK Parliament / Open data

Armed Forces Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Boyce (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 8 November 2021. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Armed Forces Bill.

My Lords, I oppose this amendment. Fundamentally, I believe that it would be seriously detrimental to the chain of command. I have some questions. Will membership be voluntary? Would there be a subscription? Would all Armed Forces members be expected to join?

I want to focus particularly on the purpose mentioned in the amendment: that the federation might represent members on welfare, remuneration and efficiency. On welfare, we have the covenant. We have myriad Armed Forces charities, and we have the internal welfare services and a number of other things. I cannot see what value this would add. On remuneration, the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body has respect among the members of the Armed Forces. How would this dovetail with the federation? On efficiency, what do we mean by efficiency? Is it fighting efficiency—in which case, what will the competence of the federation be to decide what is good or bad efficiency on the fighting side of life?

The amendment also says that:

“The Armed Forces Federation may represent a member of the armed forces at any proceedings”.

Would we have to have an Armed Forces federation member, rather like a Soviet commissar, on ships deployed for example in the Pacific? I think this is completely impractical.

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
815 c407GC 
Session
2021-22
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Back to top