Armed Forces Commissioner Bill

Baroness Newlove Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 5th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Newlove (Con)]

My Lords, I am pleased to contribute to the Second Reading of the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill. Like many people, I do not have a military background, but I wish to declare that I am an honorary colonel of the Merseyside Army Cadets. I am really proud to be their champion. The young girls feel like family. That is why I wanted to take part. Also, as Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales, the similarity of the role is why I want to speak today.

In fact, when I came back as Victims’ Commissioner in October 2023, I was delighted to see that as Victims’ Commissioner I was welcomed to the Ministry of Defence, a superb building I had never been in, so I look forward to attending the service committee board. I first met Judge Large via Teams. He was also delighted to welcome me back because he knows that I come from the human aspect of individuals and how they feel. In fact, after our last meeting, I can declare that I am going to visit a court martial to witness what goes on there, I am going to Catterick and to the Army Foundation College in Harrogate, and I am also going to see victims’ homes and victims’ support workers. I think it is very important, especially at this time, when the Ministry of Justice is looking at the criminal justice system, to put the systems together.

This is a timely and necessary step in ensuring that the welfare of our service personnel and their families is at the heart of defence policy. The establishment of the Armed Forces commissioner will provide a powerful, independent voice for those who serve and the families who support them. I know that by putting their voices at the heart of this role, there is nothing more rewarding for those seeking help and guidance about kit, food, education, homes and support for spouses in the workplace. I know we will see them feeling heard at last by having this commissioner.

Expectations have been discussed about the new commissioner’s role, so I appreciate that they will be high, but if the commissioner is like me, they will like a good challenge, and I have pushed many doors. When I started as Victims’ Commissioner, it was done on the back of a cigarette packet. Now I have more staff, but not enough. Now I have more funding, but not enough, and there are still doors to be pushed. So I say that, whoever that candidate is, they will be a strong advocate, they will be capable of challenging the system and they will earn the trust and support of the Armed Forces. What criteria will the Government use to appoint the commissioner? How will the role differ from, as we have heard from previous speakers, that of the existing Service Complaints Ombudsman?

For me, families play a crucial role in our Armed Forces. Indeed, they are the backbone of military communities and help those who are in need. They are central to this Bill. That is in Clause 4. Like many speakers in this debate, I would like a better definition of “family member” because I have the same arguments about who is involved within the criminal justice system. In fact, my late husband was the victim, and I am his family, so I get the connection and how we need to get this better. I ask my friend the Minister—I call him my friend because, as everybody says, he is really good across the House; I know there is etiquette, but there you go—whether he can give me a clearer definition of who will be included under the Bill. In particular, bereaved families go to my heart because when asking them to actually cope the mechanism that is in place has to be really strong for them, and so it deserves strong advocacy from the commissioner.

The commissioner must also be accessible. I am probably twittering because I have been up since 5.30 am doing media on my latest report on court backlogs, so I am boring myself with my own voice at the moment; I do apologise. It is really important that people can have accessibility. I am just a bit concerned, if it is only digital, about how that will encourage people to come forward. Also, there are those deployed abroad or those who have literacy challenges. We all go to digital, but we all want to throw the computer or phone out of the window when it does not work. How will the Government ensure that all personnel can engage with the commissioner’s office? Communication is really poor for victims of the criminal justice system and I know it creates a barrier. It is an unnecessary barrier for the families to feel, yet again, that they are blocked.

A lot of measures will be put in place. I heard other speakers go on about independence. Again, I can say that the Victims’ Commissioner is independent. Believe you me, when anybody announces me as the Government’s Victims’ Commissioner, I stand up there and say that I am certainly not. Independence is important, but it depends on how you interpret that word. That will come down to the advocate that the commissioner will be, given that the Secretary of State will appoint, fund and may dismiss the commissioner. If we can get the strength in that commissioner then we can absolutely look at the finer detail.

On resources—I love this one—commissioner’s proposed budget is £4.5 million to £5.5 million annually. I know that this is based on the German armed forces commissioner, who has 60 parliamentary staff. I know the Minister cannot say exactly but I would like to know how much resource the Armed Forces commissioner will have in place. If that person needs more staff, will the Government give them the resources? I have been there. It is a really good debate to have.

The most important thing to say is that I am really concerned about the culture of our Armed Forces, especially the messaging that we are seeing. I also send my respect to the family of Jaysley Beck—a really beautiful soul, taken unnecessarily so early in life. I want to see what support the commissioner can give to help the personnel feel that they can seek help. This is an area where everybody is resilient and tough, and is trained to know better, but we need to look at what resilience means. It is a virtue that enables people to move through hardship towards better outcomes. Sadly, no one escapes pain, fear and suffering. Nevertheless, from pain you can have wisdom, from pain and fear you can get courage, and from suffering you can gain strength. I only know that as I stand here today. More importantly, we need to break down these barriers. I wish this role every success and look forward to having more clarification as the Bill progresses.

Armed Forces Commissioner Bill

Baroness Newlove Excerpts

Committee stage
Wednesday 19th March 2025 Grand Committee

[Baroness Newlove (Con)]

My Lords, this is an interesting section for me, as the Victims’ Commissioner, because it feels very much like déjà vu. Governments like to do the window dressing but they do not put in the greater detail that will put the pillars into this role.

I want this to be a successful role. Yesterday, I was in—is it Havant? I should have learned my geography when I was at high school. I met all the military—their services, law and everything. There is a will to change the culture and to change for victims but, as I said at Second Reading, I worry that we have to resource this. I know that there is not a lot of money around and that defence has quite a high profile on its own ability but, in terms of this role being a success, I worry about the word “may”; the Bill says that the Secretary of State “may” give this for other staff.

I say that because of my present situation looking at budgets. There are figures being made without consulting the Victims’ Commissioner, so I am conscious that there could be figures made without consulting the Armed Forces commissioner. Previous amendments looked at this commissioner coming in and being raring to go; actually, in reality and practicality, things will take the first three years after their establishment. As with any business outside this Westminster bubble, it takes many years to set up staff because the process of getting staff is so slow.

It is also about enabling your network. It does not matter what that looks like: we have to ensure that we can make those resources available. Yes, I would like the costing to go down because there will be fewer victims, but, in reality, that could do a disservice to the gold-standard service that the commissioner gives. You are then going to whittle it down. I am really concerned about where we will get the resources. I do not want individuals to feel as though we are going to have all the grandeur and that we have committed to this as legislators but, in reality, when they go through the nooks and crannies of this, we have set things up to fail at the first hurdle. I say this in terms of not just the commissioner we put in place but the victims, the families and everybody else, because I know that there is a huge family in the military; I learned a lot about it yesterday.

It is more important that we start as we mean to go on. I do support this Bill. I am not looking at the Minister because he is not in charge of the purse strings, but I know—I have the scars to prove it and am still doing it—that, if you do not set up this role as it should be, it will absolutely do a disservice to the people who are desperate to have that voice of an independent.

[The Earl of Minto (Con)]

My Lords, I too will be very brief with these amendments.

I suggest that it is difficult to see how one should quantify what constitutes adequate assistance for the commissioner. Of course, the commissioner must have the necessary resources to execute their duties efficiently. The Explanatory Notes estimate that, as my noble friend Lord Lancaster pointed out, the cost of this new office will be between £4.5 million and £5.5 million; that is considerably larger than the current cost of the ombudsman, which is £1.8 million. The funding, therefore, has been expanded. Is it sufficient?

Furthermore, as is the usual course, the Secretary of State will have to ensure that the commissioner receives the correct level of support. I am minded to conclude that these amendments may not be entirely necessary.

--- Later in debate ---

Amendments 9 to 11 not moved.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Baroness Newlove) (Con)]

My Lords, I cannot call Amendment 12 as Amendment 11 was not moved.

Committee adjourned at 7.32 pm.