Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Viscount Slim (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 12 October 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Armed Forces Bill.


Armed Forces Bill

Perhaps we could debate whether a Government or politicians should tamper with and sanitise history, but we do not need to do so today. One or two noble Lords have mentioned their fathers and grandfathers. I remember having this conversation with my father. I can recall it quite well. He said to me, ““I think the problem was that if you were court-martialled for this, you probably didn’t have much of a chance””. Rather like the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mayhew, said, it was the court martial system, its speed and so on. Then my father said one thing else: ““Mind you, I think probably one or two of them deserved it””. That is probably true. In this instance, I go along with the noble Lord, Lord Dubs. He and I have spoken fairly briefly on the matter. I do not consider that enough has been said about the people who had to put these laws into action. Fortunately, Members of the Committee have today rightly spoken about exonerating all those who sat on the courts martial. It was not much fun being on such a court martial, particularly if an officer had fought through the night and had been pulled back to sit on a court martial. We should look forward. As the noble Lord, Lord Garden, rightly said, we are considering a forward-looking Bill. If a soldier has stuck it out in the line for a long time and has done his duty—““done the business””, as they say today—he does not think much of a chap who deserts or throws his rifle down, lies in the bottom of a slit trench and takes no further part in the battle. Whether that is cowardice or desertion is probably for a lawyer to decide, but men who stick out a battle do not think much of a chap who behaves like that. Therefore, when making law on mutiny or desertion, as we are doing in the Bill, we must think of that aspect. It is not just a case of lawyers or governments making law but of the view of men who behave perfectly correctly in battle not thinking much of a chap who chucks in the towel. We must be very careful not to make a habit of this sort of clause, even though today we do not shoot people accused of these offences. The soldier who does his duty in battle and does it well is perfectly entitled not to think much of a chap who does not.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
685 c427-8 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Children Compensation Armed forces Death Convictions Aircraft Courts martial Desertion Coroners Employment Equality Drugs Harassment Judges International law Qualifications Powers Membership Prosecutions Misuse Staff Officers Prerogative of mercy Miscarriages of justice Military law Military aircraft Sentencing Young people Reserve forces Testing Rules of procedure World War I Time limits Trial in camera
Legislation
Armed Forces Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk