Consultation about to close on legal protection for personnel and veterans; Queen's Speech 14.10.2019

OK, I see that the BAFF DRAFT replies, with box for any comment by you, are now publicly available and they are already being read, starting at:
Please try to keep the insults going for the next few hours, so that as many as possible do have the chance to see this thread. I'll check in again in the late afternoon. Thanks all for your interest.
 
We are now closing the BAFF consultation in order to complete the BAFF response to the MOD. There is still time - until midnight tonight Sun 13 Oct - for anyone to respond direct to the MOD online or by email. Thanks all.
 
I agree with A-Y (which I usually do because I like his hat). The consultation itself is still vitally important because it will (and must) be taken into account by any post-GE Government and Parliament.

There is still time for anyone here to refer to the link and complete the survey online or by email.

Also, BAFF has been running an internal consultation, over a shorter time than is ideal, but it was announced on the BAFF website and on its FB page:
The draft BAFF reply to the consultation (led by myself) is just about complete. In view of the urgency I think BAFF may agree to making the reply publicly available on their website as soon as possible with the opportunity for anyone to comment there (TBC), and/or comment here on BAFF if preferred.

Ultimately I will be guided most heavily by views of BAFF full members, but in the event of disagreement which can't be resolved in the time available I always have the option of making a personal response to MOD taking other views into account.
Let's leave the discussion to one side for a moment.


That hat's very unbecoming.

Auld Yin would look like a veritable Matineé idol with almost any other titfer.


Carry on.
 
Let's leave the discussion to one side for a moment.


That hat's very unbecoming.

Auld Yin would look like a veritable Matineé idol with almost any other titfer.


Carry on.
Can’t decide whether to give that a ‘Funny’ or a ‘VERY STRONG DISAGREE’!
 
I don't believe that military veterans should receive any special protection. What I would like to see is any investigation is done properly and done once, unless significant and compelling evidence comes to light. Conducting witch hunt style investigations to suit a political agenda is unnecessary, creates animosity, is likely to be detrimental to recruitment and retention and smacks of toxicity.
The situation re NI exits because the systems put in place in the early years of Op Banner for the investigation of servicemen was both flawed and in some respects unlawful. Crucually however, those directly affected had no control, no input, no authority and no mechanism through which they could even become aware of these inadequacies, let alone influence them. The government were, and remain, the accountable authority for that shambles.

For these reasons it is completely ultra vires that prosecutions previously discounted should be reignited with the exception of cases where new evidence becomes available, Now that in itself allows for continued investigation in order for victims and their families to gain a rightful measure of justice, albeit in most cases where the state is found culpable, the victim(s) will need to seek a remedy in civil law. That process could and should be made much simpler for the sole purpose of dealing with NI legacy issues. If the current impasse comtinues I look forward to the day that a veteran thus affected sues the MOD for damages to him/herself and family for the stress and psychological damage caused by incompetent systemic inadequacies in the administration of the armed forces during Op Banner 1969-75............or thereabouts.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top