Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Reid of Cardowan (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 4 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Armed Forces Bill.


Armed Forces Bill

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. I want to follow up on the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Newton, a couple of moments ago. When the Minister confirms that representations to the Parliamentary Ombudsman must come via an MP, will he recognise that, although it would create a special category for the Armed Forces, members of those forces already give up their right to lobby and to act politically in a public fashion pursuing such a case, as is the natural right of all British citizens? That does not necessarily disengage them from party-political membership but it does disengage them from party-political or public-political activity. They are therefore caught between a demand that they go via a route that could be interpreted as lobbying an MP and, on the other hand, the necessity for representations to the Parliamentary Ombudsman to be via that very route. Will the Minister bear that in mind and keep an open mind on it so that, if he finds that they are thus disadvantaged, a special category can be made available for members of the Armed Forces to go directly to the Parliamentary Ombudsman?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c1041 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Conditions of employment Alcoholic drinks Disadvantaged Armed forces Death Crimes of violence Costs Commonwealth Devolution Coroners Advocacy Health Education Drugs Misuse Ombudsman Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration Mental health Malaysia Military decorations Training Young people Resignations Local Government Ombudsman Veterans
Legislation
Armed Forces Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk