The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. The office of the chief coroner would seek to address some of the issues that he raises about the variations and the inconsistencies in families' experiences. Each time that the office of the chief coroner has been considered by Parliament it has been supported—twice in 2009, and just last December the other place voted to save it. The Secretary of State for Justice does not seem to be listening, and not for the first time. He cites cost as an issue, but the Royal British Legion and INQUEST have been clear that they are prepared to open discussions on how the cost can be reduced. I hope that the Minister will listen to these pleas. This is exactly the sort of decision that must be subject to greater accountability and scrutiny. At present an issue so central to the armed forces community would not be covered by the armed forces report on the covenant, and that is why we tabled the amendment. I ask the Minister today to commit to making representations on behalf of the armed forces community to keep the office of the chief coroner. I hope that at the very least the Government will support this amendment to ensure that this vital issue is reported on annually.
As I have previously said, we were all entertained in Committee by the Minister with responsibility for veterans as he performed verbal gymnastics on the issue of whether the Government were meeting the Prime Minister's famous commitment given on the deck of the Ark Royal. However, just as important as writing the covenant into law, the Bill should provide a form of accountability so that the principles contained in the covenant mean something in reality, and that is what new clause 14 seeks to achieve.
During the debates in preparation for Green Paper in 2009, my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) tells me that he argued strongly, against the wishes of his officials, that parliamentary and local government ombudsmen should provide a system of accountability. The ombudsmen were happy to take on that work and it was included in the 2009 Green Paper—the nation's commitment to the armed forces community: consistent and enduring support. The Opposition continue to believe that that is the right approach. In Committee, the Minister was at pains to point out that officials advise and Minister's decide, but given the weak nature of what has been proposed in the Bill, it appears that his officials are more in control than he would care to admit.
Armed Forces Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Gemma Doyle
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 June 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Armed Forces Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
529 c699-700 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:31:09 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748750
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748750
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748750