Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Empey (Ulster Unionist Party) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 September 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Armed Forces Bill.


Armed Forces Bill

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his response. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, that the Minister and his colleagues will wish to reflect on the debate, and we will wish to reflect on what he has said. As the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, said, the phraseology that we have used in these amendments may not be ideal. Nevertheless, I think there is a consensus in the Committee that there needs to be some way—I do not wish this to clash with the devolution settlement in any way—of allowing Parliament to ensure that the various component parts of the UK are co-operating in this regard. If that is not done, they may diverge over time. That is something none of us would wish to see. As I say, we will wish to reflect on the Minister’s response. Amendment 14 not moved. Amendments 15 and 16 not moved. Clause 2 agreed. Amendment 17 Moved by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c46GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Disclosure of information Conditions of employment Crime Alcoholic drinks Armed forces Annual reports Discharges Coroners Advocacy Housing Health services Education Drugs Mental illness Ministerial duties Misuse Ministers Military law Young people Service Complaints Commissioner Veterans
Legislation
Armed Forces Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk