The Deepcut Review

Nicholas Blake QC was appointed on 15th December 2004 to review the circumstances surrounding the deaths of four soldiers at Deepcut between 1995 and 2002. The Review covers in detail the deaths of three soldiers, Sean Benton, Cheryl James and Geoff Gray: the fourth death, that of James Collinson, was subject to an outstanding inquest and so was not investigated in detail, nor are the inquest results. The Review also deals with aspects of Army policy on recruitment and training over a ten year period, and matters relating to the Training Regiment at Deepcut. The review has concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, the deaths of Sean Benton, Cheryl James and Geoff Gray were self-inflicted, and that the opportunity for self-infliction was afforded by the policy of frequently assigning trainees to armed guard duty at Deepcut, unsupervised by experienced soldiers or members of the Military Provost Guard. The Review does not feel that a public inquiry into the immediate or broader events surrounding the deaths is necessary. Sean Benton, who had attempted self-harm on at least two occasions in the months before he died, had had disciplinary problems in his Army career, had been notified that his discharge from the Army was being applied for, and had previously been denied access to a weapon on guard duty; on the day of his death he obtained the weapon from another trainee under false pretences. There was no evidence that Cheryl James or Geoff Gray posed a risk of self-harm, and no certainty as to what might have led them to their actions. They had both performed frequent armed guard duties at remote locations, which might have made them unhappy, and combined with other personal factors may have made them more susceptible to self-harm at the time of their deaths. There was no evidence of bullying in any of the three cases. Factors contributing to the deaths might have been: the training environment at Deepcut, causing low morale through poor accommodation, limited recreational facilities, and the balance between privacy and dormitory life; unsupervised access to weapons; supervision of trainees; discipline, bullying and informal sanctions; ventilation of grievances; poor instructors. The Review makes 34 recommendations covering: recruitment, screening of recruits and parental involvement; training for minors and the length of training; provisions for minors during training; supervisory ratios; the quality of instructors; information on standards of conduct; collective responsibility; making and responding to complaints; investigating complaints; record-keeping; an ombudsman for the armed forces; guard duty; sudden deaths; disclosure and confidentiality; whether there is a need for a public inquiry.

'Passing Out. Fantastic. Best day. Nothing's ever come close. All your mates around you and you're looking forward to your next step and our next step was Deepcut!' 18 year old Private Cheryl James from Llangollen was one of four young soldiers who died from gunshot wounds at Deepcut Barracks between 1995 and 2002. Cheryl’s parents wanted answers from the people responsible for their daughter’s care. But how do you begin to grieve when no-one seems to have a proper explanation? What would give you the determination to continue asking awkward, demanding questions? Taken from original source material and powerful first hand testimonies, Deep Cut is a bold and compelling account of one family’s journey through a time they thought they’d never experience, to places they hoped they’d never be.

This document sets out the Government's response to the report of the Deepcut Review (HCP 795, session 2005-06, ISBN 0102937079) published in March 2006, which examined the circumstances surrounding the deaths of four young soldiers at Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut between 1995 and 2002. The Review concluded that, although the Army did not cause the deaths of the soldiers, there were failures to identify and address potential sources of risk in recruitment and training procedures, particularly in the duty of care to young recruits. The Government's reply accepts the majority of the recommendations made by the Review, though with qualification or modification in some cases. With regards to the recommendation for the creation of an Armed Forces Ombudsman, the Government argues that this proposal would be difficult to reconcile with the workings of a military complaints system, in terms of the chain of command and the role of prosecuting authorities. The Government proposes that the key purpose underlying the recommendation can be met by the appointment of an independent commissioner to oversee the fairness and effectiveness of the military justice system (as proposed under the Armed Forces Bill), with direct access to Ministers and with the power to refer complaints or allegations of bullying and harassment to commanding officers for action.

While military law is often narrowly understood and studied as the specific and specialist laws, processes and institutions governing service personnel, this accessible book takes a broader approach, examining military justice from a wider consideration of the rights and duties of government and soldiers engaged in military operations.

It is accepted that the steady increase in the level of Service complaints made directly to the chain of command or referred by the Commissioner may indicate an increasing level of confidence in the system. However, there is concern noting the Commissioner's comments regarding a much lower rate of annual increase in contacts about matters that could become Service complaints compared to the first three years that her post had existed. This concern is heightened by other organisations, such as the Service Families Federations, reporting lower levels of contact from Service personnel, solicitors reporting an increase in the number of individuals approaching them as they felt the Commissioner had no powers, and the increase in the number of people not pursuing matters with the Commissioner after initial contact for the same reason. There is also concern that the Commissioner and others are reporting that fears of redundancy among Service personnel appear to be deterring them from making Service complaints. It is unacceptable that Service personnel who believe they have a genuine grievance in relation to redundancy or any other matter are reluctant to seek redress and resolution of the matter through the appropriate channels because they fear the consequences of making a complaint. As a matter of urgency the MoD and the Commissioner should investigate this matter. The Service Complaints Commissioner role is an integral part of honouring the Armed Forces Covenant and whilst there has been progress made in delivering a fair, just and efficient Service complaints system, there is still a long way to go

The Review Body's key recommendations this year are: a 2.6% increase in military salaries; a range of targeted pay measures including new financial retention incentives for submarine nuclear watchkeepers, RAF regiment gunners, RAF firefighters, REME vehicle mechanics and the Royal Artillery; a new category of specialist pay for explosive ordnance disposal operators and a targeted enhancement to submarine pay; an increase in x-factor from 13 to 14% plus revised tapering; a 2.6% increase in specialist pay, compensatory allowances and reserves' bounties; and a 3.7% increase to Grade 1 SFA/SLA rental charges and lower graduated increases below Grade 1, a phased increase to garage rent and introduction of the daily food charge

The Palgrave Review of British Politics 2006 provides up-to-date coverage of developments in British government and politics written by a team of leading experts. This is an indispensable reference book covering the entire political year focussing on the key topics. It also includes a statistical appendix.

In this inquiry the Committee examines the effectiveness of the current Service complaints procedures based on the findings of the Service Complaints Commissioner, Dr Susan Atkins, in her first annual report. It also examines the Commissioner's evaluation of the support given to her by the Ministry of Defence during the year. The report sets out the background to the creation of the role and details the Service Complaints System that is explained to Service personnel in Joint Service Publication 831 (issued December 2008). Finally the Committee considers how the Commissioner has operated in her first year. The Commissioner has set clear aims, values and objectives for her office: understanding the environment of the three Services, delivering good customer service, ensuring widespread knowledge of the new system, establishing a reliable recording system for complaints, ensuring effective integration of the SCC and Tri-Service systems, establishing expectations and requirements, and delivering her annual report on time. The Committee commends Dr Atkins for her regular and frequent visits to military bases and to operational theatre to gain an understanding of the environment of the three Services, and how the complaints system operates in practice. Knowledge in the Services of the Commissioner and her role is patchy and more should be done by the Ministry to improve that. Staff resources should also be increased. It is still too early to decide whether the Commissioner has sufficient powers. The next annual report should be presented formally to Parliament.