---

Army Barracks (Deaths)

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) for securing this debate, and for her tenacious campaigning on behalf of Deepcut and Beyond. I also pay tribute to Deepcut and Beyond; I have had the privilege of meeting the group on a number of occasions in my role as a member of the Select Committee on Defence and, more recently, as a member of the Committee considering the Armed Forces Bill. That determined group of individuals has done a great public service by exposing some of the most horrendous cases of bullying and by asking questions on matters that have been covered up by the military for far too long. I support the armed forces not least because many young recruits come from my constituency and the north-east—and they are proud to serve in the armed forces. However, I am not proud of the way in which some people have been treated in the armed forces. The Deepcut and Beyond group of families has exposed some problems, and not only at Deepcut; as my hon. Friend said, Mrs. Farr and others are continuing their work by helping new recruits at Catterick. In the last Parliament, I had the privilege of being a member of the Defence Committee when it considered the duty of care that the three armed forces have for youngsters in their charge. The inquiry lasted a year and took evidence not only from families but from the three armed forces. The Committee's report is a definitive work on the way in which such youngsters are looked after. As an historic reference, some past practices were appalling. The Committee heard not only how the Deepcut families were treated but heard shocking evidence of how others had been treated and how they were dealt with afterwards. There has been an improvement in the way in which the armed forces handle things—for instance, in what they should do if people die while in the forces. Recently, I moved new clause 24 to the Armed Forces Bill, in which I called for an independent commissioner to oversee complaints against the armed forces. Without such a commissioner, the reputation of the armed forces, which has been damaged, will continue to fall. The Bill gives us the opportunity to put matters right. I withdrew the new clause because the Blake report was due to be published the following afternoon, and I did not want to pre-empt it. I was assured by the Minister that the Government would consider those issues as the Bill went through Parliament and in their response to the Blake report.