The Part time Defence Secretary....

[Guzlin Adnams]

:yuk: Sorry if this has already been mentioned but I couldn't help but notice a little story on the radio this morning. Our marvelous part time defence secretary wants to gag Coroners......
He doesn't want them to keep blaming the MoD (er government) for failing to provide the services with what they need to do the job that they are asking them to do. That's my understanding anyway.:sad:

[Epimetheus]

The BBC report

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7300932.stm

[Fortyodd2]

Dear Des,
How about, as minister in charge of the MOD, you personally ensure that said MOD finally gets it sh!t in one sock thereby removing the need for Coroners to be in a situation needing them to be critical in the first place.
On the other hand, you could resign and offer your services to the Chinese who currently have a vacancy in the "Good news from Tibet" department. I'm sure you would be well qualified and fit in perfectly. :ugh:

[Al R]

Regardless of the legal niceties (and I do have my reservations about how Walker has politicised the process), the deaths of Private Smith and every other death which could and should have been avoided out there should be firmly laid at the door of the Secretary of State for Defence. Somehow though, I don't think that he is likely to bother himself too much about it. The only thing he is any good at defending, is his arse.

People like Browne know the price of everything and value of nothing. I look forward to seeing the day when Crown Immunity is lifted for acts of criminal incompetence and hiding behind the law is done away for ever. I look forward to the day too, when things are done because they are the right thing to do.. and not simply buffing these up by hiding behind words like 'prudent' and 'tough decisions'. I reflect on the likes of Lord Carrington who resigned out of a sense of honour, loyalty and commitment to the system he realised that he was responsible for letting down.

I think though, that within the MoD, it would be more than Broon who would be looking at themselves this morning if that were the case.

[Gainesy]

And that is the only time you will see the words Browne, honour and loyalty in the same paragraph.

Whatever happened to the proposed march?

[Dockers]

You may be interested in what is going on on Arrse: http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=92201#1858981

[BattlerBritain]

Well they certainly don't mince their words over on the Arrse forum do they!

And I agree with all of them.

[Epimetheus]

Slight thread drift but couldn't see the need to start a new one just to highlight another govt-bashing article, this time in the Times summarising the Basra palace withdrawal. Final 3 paras quoted, link at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3571258.ece


Painfully aware that the Army was now more of an antagonistic influence on Basra than a palliative one, and that it was clearly unable to fight simultaneous campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, there was little other option but for the British to draw up their plans to pull back from Basra Palace to a final overwatch position at the airport.

By the time this penultimate chapter occurred, a generation of British soldiers had emerged from the Iraq experience battle-hardened and cynical. They are aware that the demands placed upon them were seldom matched by support from the Government, which had committed them to an unpopular and ultimately futile war. The sense of vestigial anger within the Army will unlikely be appeased in Afghanistan, where they face a different set of challenges but labour under a similar set of shortfalls, directed by a political strategy that remains at best opaque.

However, history finally records the British Army’s involvement in Iraq, the question “What was it all for?” seems certain to haunt the dreams of thousands of veterans for years to come.

[JessTheDog]

Des Browne is a disgrace, a mendacious incompetent slimy sh!t.


It is pointed out on ARRSE that this may be linked to the upcoming inquests into the Herc and Nimrod crashes, both of which have generated extensive commentary on safety concerns, whether defensive aids or airworthiness.

On the plus side, this will backfire. On ARRSE, someone has posted a response from Liam Fox's office so the Tories will run with this.

Add fuel to the flames. Write to the papers. Remember, full name and address and contact phone number, request anonymity if serving.

letters @ thetimes.co.uk
dtletters @ telegraph.co.uk
letters @ guardian.co.uk
letters @ independent.co.uk

Browne and Hoon should be in the dock for presiding over a system of institutional criminal negligence. Why can't the MoD be prosecuted under Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 when the failings have occured in the UK, as with the tragic parachute death when a two-way radio (as requested by the training staff) may have saved him?

[John Blakeley]

The Government still enjoys Crown Immunity against a criminal action on Health and Safety but NOT for civil liability - the Public and Commercial Services Union offers the following comments on their web site:
www.pcs.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=884239

Crown Immunity

Crown Immunity, under health and safety law, is a term that is known by many but understood by few. It is often cited to PCS Safety Reps as a reason for inaction by management who wrongly believe that it means that they do not have to worry about health and safety law.

We look here at precisely what 'Crown Immunity' means. BUT this is only applicable in health and safety terms, as different exemptions may apply under other legislation.

Health & Safety Law

To properly understand Crown Immunity, it is necessary to first understand the legal framework for health and safety.

The law governing health and safety can be split into two - Statute Law and Common Law. Statute law is concerned with regulations and Acts of Parliament. Common Law is based on the past decisions of judges - precedent - and the common law rule that everyone owes a duty to everyone else (the 'duty of care').

Criminal or Civil liability?

If an employer fails to take reasonable care to protect an employee from a foreseeable injury, he or she could be found by the courts to have breached the 'duty of care'. This is 'Civil Liability' and in such cases, damages can be awarded against the employer. There is no immunity for the Crown, and PCS takes many successful cases through their legal scheme against Government Departments and Agencies.

Criminal liability arises mainly from statute law - though it also arises for the common law offences of murder and manslaughter. Prosecution is in the criminal courts, in most cases are taken by either Health and Safety Executive Inspectors or local authority Environmental Health Officers and penalties on conviction can be a fine and/or imprisonment.

It is quite possible for an employer to be sued, under common law, by an injured employee for damages and to be prosecuted under criminal liability for breaching statute law.

Crown Immunity from Criminal Liability

Action in the criminal courts is taken 'on behalf of the Crown'. Statute law is approved by the Crown (Royal Assent). It would, it is said, be strange for the Crown to prosecute itself and this is the basis for the Crown being 'immune' from prosecution for criminal liability.

The Crown is not, however, 'immune' from the requirements of health & safety legislation generally. All of these duties are placed on the Crown just as on any other employer. The only difference is what action can be taken under criminal law if the Crown fails in its duties.

What is meant by 'the Crown'?

With the on-going changes to the Civil Service, it is increasingly difficult to come to a strict definition of what is meant by 'the Crown'. The HSE will look at each particular case as it arises before finally deciding whether the employer is covered by Crown Immunity.

Whilst it is fair to assume that all core Departments within the Civil Service will enjoy Crown Immunity, it is possible that some Agencies will no longer be protected in this way.

Campaigning for change

PCS is opposed to crown immunity - we believe that it is fundamentally responsible for many of the shortcomings in current health and safety arrangements in government departments and agencies. After years of quiet campaigning, we saw a first success in 2000, when the government's Revitalising Health and Safety strategy document committed them, for the first time, to the abolition of Crown Immunity for health and safety offences. Since then, we have been pressing for the earliest possible legislation on this. To date, we are still waiting, though now others, such the Centre for Corporate Accountability, are beginning to take an interest in the issue.


JB

[Thaihawk]

If an airline operated an aircraft as dangerous as some of the Nimrod fleet,they would be grounded forthwith.

To the arrogant communists in new labour,a British serviceman's life is not worth sh*t.

[BattlerBritain]

It could well be that the squirming toe-rags might be hoist by their own petard:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3578801.ece

I wonder if the Hercules and Nimrod families are considering the same sort of action?

[cargosales]

I've emailed my MP, a pro-forces Tory, asking him what the Conservatives are actually doing to bring Comrades Brown and Browne to book over this disgraceful episode. I pointed out that what they are actually doing will go a long way towards deciding who I actually vote for at the next election. I await his reply with interest.

They very appropriately named http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ has a postcode search so you can find your MP or you can email them directly via that site.

[BEagle]

I wonder whether anyone will be grilling Incapability Brown at today's PMQs about Swiss Des' attempt to stifle the coroners' verdicts?

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/swissdes.jpg

How can anyone not see the Stalinist nature of this pathetic excuse for a current government with its surveillance society and attempted control of the judiciary? Surely even Comrade Pr00ne must now see them for what they truly are?

[airborne_artist]

I pointed out that what they are actually doing will go a long way towards deciding who I actually vote for at the next election. I await his reply with interest.

I note that the Tories were totally silent on this matter at today's PMQs. A smack in the face for the families concerned, IMHO.

[Razor61]

A response has been made to the petition on the 10 Downing Petitions site referring to Two Jobs Des.

Here is the original petition:-
"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Require the Secretary of State for Defence to be the sole responsibility of a single Minister."

Details of Petition:

"The complex and demanding brief of Defence cannot be handled by a minister who has other portfolios, such as the shared responsibility of Secretary of State for Defence and Secretary of State for Scotland. The role of Secretary of State for Defence must be a sole responsibility of a single Minister, otherwise it undermines decision-making ability and sends the clear message that defence is a part-time concern. We therefore call on the Prime Minister to reshuffle the Cabinet to reorganise the Defence portfolio so it is the sole responsibility of a single Minister, and to establish it as convention that this is to be the case henceforth.


Here is Gordon Browns Office reply:-
The Government holds our Armed Forces in the highest regard and the Secretary of State for Defence's priority remains the defence of the UK, the success of our ongoing operations and providing the best possible support to our Service personnel and their families back at home.

Since Des Browne was appointed as Secretary of State for Defence in 2006 he has continued to give the role his full attention. For example, he has visited Afghanistan and Iraq on twelve occasions, three visits of which have taken place since he was appointed as Secretary of State for Scotland at the end of June 2007. The Secretary of State's record speaks for itself. Since holding the two positions, the Ministry has delivered an improved operational welfare package, with additional council tax relief and free post beyond the Christmas period; further financial and practical support to assist in speeding up inquests; a review of the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme with improved compensation for those with multiple injuries; sustained outstanding operational medical capability; improved commitments and funding for accommodation, especially for single living accommodation; ongoing provision of equipment for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan - with more helicopters and further Protected Patrol Vehicles. This demonstrates the Government's commitment to defence and to the men and women who serve with the utmost bravery in our Armed Forces.

The Secretary of State is engaged in defence business seven days a week. Officials in his Private Offices in both departments liaise closely to manage diary commitments and through use of email and video conferencing facilities he is able to deal with defence business and make important decisions regardless of where he is located.

[Old Ned]

Have written to my MP Edward Leigh (sadly a p**tt), but you can only write to your own. Also asked him to tell "Dave" Cameron to stop poncing about and really oppose this government. All they do is pussy foot about when they should show them up for what they really are. As so succinctly put in the ARRSE link above.

Unfortunately the only MP around my neck of the woods who is worth a light is Gillian Merron, who is sadly "one of them". He may be Labour, but Frank Field is the sort of guy we need, even if he is "one of them" too!

[lowlypax]

Here is Gordon Browns Office reply:-
The Government holds our Armed Forces in the highest regard and the Secretary of State for Defence's priority remains the defence of the UK, the success of our ongoing operations and providing the best possible support to our Service personnel and their families back at home.

Since Des Browne was appointed as Secretary of State for Defence in 2006 he has continued to give the role his full attention.If Swiss Des has two jobs how can he give one of them his full attention? Are there two of him? A reply like that demonstrates (a) the contempt they hold our armed forces in and/or (b) that it was written by an idiot.

[A2QFI]

QUOTE "The Secretary of State is engaged in defence business seven days a week." Problem is it is only for one hour a day!

[AdanaKebab]

If I was Scottish I'd be really annoyed that Defence was occupying too much of the Ministers time.
Perhaps a petition by the Scots might produce a similar response!

[Fortyodd2]

"The Secretary of State's record speaks for itself."

Yes, sadly, it does. :sad::sad::sad::sad::sad:

[JessTheDog]

This is Stalinist propaganda - the truth plays no part in this. This government thinks it can say something and it is accepted as truth and, as with the attempt to gag coroners, they are trying to close down dissent. I bet if a petition was started calling for Browne's removal as Scottish Secretary, a mirror answer would be generated saying he spends 24/7 working on Scottish matters.

Ideally politics would be seperate from any campaign to better the lot of the Armed Forces. However, I am increasingly of the mind that nothing will change and that the best we can do is to wreck the Labour party for a generation or two in the same way that they have wrecked the Armed Forces. Kick them out in May's local elections, kick them out in a few years time in Westminster and the devolved administrations, consign their wretched party to oblivion and obscurity for the next 20 years, tear up the quangos, turf them out of Europe, pursue those suspected of wrongdoing and jail them, enjoy their decline into wretched obscurity and irrelevance, let them taste the bitterness of seeing something they cherish wrecked.

The job below apparently fits into tea breaks:

http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/devolution/secretary-of-state.html

The primary role of the Secretary of State for Scotland is to promote the devolution settlement and to act as guardian of it. He promotes partnership between the Government and the Scottish Executive and between the two Parliaments. At the same time, the Secretary of State continues to represent Scottish interests in reserved matters within the UK Government, advising colleagues about any distinctive Scottish aspects that arise for reasons other than the impact on devolved matters and supporting them in presenting Government policies in Scotland.

Reserved matters include:

UK Single market
Energy regulation, UK and international transport
Immigration and nationality
Social security
Taxation and economic management
Foreign Affairs (including European Union negotiations)
Defence
National Security
The Constitution
The Secretary of State and the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State between them are members of around 20 Cabinet Committees and Sub-Committees and are involved on an ad hoc basis as the need arises. The Secretary of State retains certain limited executive functions, notably in relation to the financial transactions between the Government and the Scottish Executive and in relation to parliamentary elections. Scotland Office Ministers also make orders (secondary legislation) under the Scotland Act. These orders are needed, occasionally to amend, and more frequently to implement, Scotland's devolution settlement.

The Secretary of State can also exercise functions under section 35 of the Scotland Act. Under section 35, the Secretary of State may make an Order prohibiting the Scottish Parliament's Presiding Officer from submitting a Bill for Royal Assent, which he has reasonable grounds to believe would be incompatible with:

any international obligations;
the interests of defence; or
the interests of national security.
The Secretary of State may also make an Order under section 35 if he reasonably believes that the Scottish Parliament Bill makes modifications to, and would have an adverse effect on, the operation of the law as it applies to reserved matters. These powers have not yet been exercised, which means that no Orders have been made by the Secretary of State under section 35 of the Scotland Act. The Scotland Office, which supports the Secretary of State, was established on 1 July 1999, following devolution. The Scotland Office works in partnership with the Scottish Executive, but is entirely separate from it, remaining part of the UK Government. In June 2003 it became part of the Department for Constitutional Affairs and in May 2007 became part of the Ministry of Justice.

Information on devolved matters (issues essentially of domestic concern to Scotland) can be obtained from www.scotland.gov.uk, the website of the Scottish Executive.

[exscribbler]

Despite what Broon says, it's my understanding that Swiss Des does only 2 days a week as SoS for Defence yet all his salary comes from the MoD budget.

My (Labour) MP didn't deny this when I asked him.:ugh:

[Guzlin Adnams]

:O God I'm so simple.......more money syphoned up North.....

[exscribbler]

I also asked my (Labour) MP how many of his party can be referred to in the House as the "Gallant Member for..." and he came up with Eric Joyce, MP for Falkirk West.

It seems he joined the Black Watch as a Private and after Sandhurst was commissioned into the AGC, so I asked if it was felt he might be considered as a possible MoD Minister or even SoS for Defence as he has two obvious advantages in that he might know something about his brief and that he's a Jock. No answer was forthcoming; why am I not surprised?:ugh:

Please note the capitalisation of "Member", so no deliberate misunderstandings, please...:E

[Beatriz Fontana]

exscribbler,

...possible MoD Minister or even SoS for Defence as he has two obvious advantages in that he might know something about his brief...

A disadvantage, surely! Crickey, imagine a Minister who actually knew something about their brief!

Sir Humph would choke on his brandy...

[exscribbler]

OK; what about the second one?:E

[dervish]

As a private in the Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment), Secretary of State is WAY below his capabilities, if not paygrade.

Nemo me impune lacessit

[Beatriz Fontana]

Yeah, well, there seems to be a fair few Scots in the Cabinet of late... you got me there!!

Actually, two of the previous Defence Ministers of Scottish extraction, Lewis and Adam, were thoroughly good eggs in my opinion. I would've put Adam up for better things, but Prime Minsters change, I suppose.