My Lords, I am grateful for the Minister’s response to my amendment. I have a wicked question to ask him, following the point made by the noble Lord, Lord West, about what happens if we start taking large numbers of casualties, especially if the circumstances of each casualty are different. Suppose in 100 days of an operation we take 10 fatalities per day. We are in for 1,000 inquests, and the circumstances of each one are different. Presumably at some point as a conflict escalated from peacekeeping to warfighting and, to put it bluntly, it was not going very well, we would have to suspend the system of inquests. It would be ridiculous—God forbid we could have 5,000 outstanding inquests! We would get to a point where we would have to stop the inquest system. That proves my perverse law that the scrutiny of each casualty is inversely proportionate to the number of casualties we take.
Armed Forces Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Earl Attlee
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 3 March 2016.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Armed Forces Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
769 c176GC Session
2015-16Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2022-04-26 12:04:38 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-03-03/16030357000157
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-03-03/16030357000157
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2016-03-03/16030357000157