APPENDIX
Letter to the Chairman from the Secretary of State
for Defence
I think we all support the idea that there is some
overlap of membership between the Defence Select Committee and
the ad hoc select committee that will consider the Bill. But I
thought it would be helpful to set out how the Bill reflects our
thinking on two matters on which your predecessor committee made
specific recommendations in their reports published in March this
year, namely the redress of complaints procedure and renewal of
Service law.
There are several models for introducing an independent
element to the wider complaints system. An independent complaints
body, or Ombusdman, is one of several possible models. Our aim
is to have a complaints system that is right for the way our Armed
Forces operate: that is fair, transparent, effective and prompt,
and in which both the chain of command and the individual Service
person can have confidence. We are considering the most appropriate
way forward. You will see in the Armed Forces Bill provision for
a redress panel that will consider complaints on behalf of the
Defence Council, and which, it is intended, will speed up the
complaints process. The panel will comprise a minimum of two members.
It will always include a senior officer and may also include a
civil servant. The panel will be independent of the chain of command.
But the Bill provides for membership of the panel to include also,
for complaints of a specified nature, an independent, external
member. We see this approach being perhaps particularly relevant
when the panel is considering complaints that relate to bullying
and harassment.
Outside the Bill, we anticipate a range of further
measures to improve the complaints process particularly in relation
to bullying and harassment. We have yet to take final decisions
on the overall package of measures under consideration but I shall
of course ensure that we share our proposals with your Committee
as soon as we are in a position to do so.
On the second issue the Bill provides as a starting
position for Service law to remain subject to renewal on a five
yearly basis by primary legislation, but not for annual renewal
by Order in Council. On consideration we were not attracted to
more frequent renewal by primary legislation as your predecessor
committee proposed. But we recognise this might be a matter where
the select committee will want to come to its own view when it
looks at the Bill as a whole. We have not closed our mind on this
issue and look forward to engaging proactively with the select
committee at the appropriate time.
2 December 2005
| 
