Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Adam Ingram (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 13 June 2006. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Deepcut Review.


Deepcut Review

I am trying to interpret what the hon. Gentleman has said in the same way in which he interpreted what Mr. Blake has said. If he is saying that putting the complaint back to the chain of command somehow undermines the quality of the decision-making process, I disagree fundamentally, and I will tell him why. The chain of command has to ensure proper discipline and structure in the organisation for which it is responsible. We cannot allow that to be transferred to someone else, even someone with a military background. We have rejected Mr. Blake’s recommendation that someone with a civilian background should try to determine the right to go to legal process, because there is nowhere in our civil processes where that would apply. This matter has been given very careful consideration. I uphold the primacy of the chain of command. I recognise that it has made mistakes in the past and will do so in the future. It is not perfect, but that is not for the want of professionalism, commitment and a determination to deliver what is best. The hon. Gentleman’s judgment should be based on how many recruits go through that training environment year upon year. It is not a broken regime. If anything, it is an exemplar for the rest of the public service, and it passes muster with anything internationally.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
447 c651 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disciplinary proceedings Death Army Coroners Families Misconduct Monitoring Military police Military bases Public inquiries Training Young people Suicide Government responses Deepcut Barracks Benton, Sean Gray, Geoff James, Cheryl Deepcut Review
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk