Draft Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026
House of Commons · General Committees · 1 Sep 2026 · 31 speeches · Official Report
The Committee consisted of the following Members:
Chair: Christine Jardine
† Argar, Edward (Melton and Syston) (Con)
† Bailey, Mr Calvin (Minister for Veterans and People)
† Brackenridge, Sureena (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
† Clark, Feryal (Enfield North) (Lab)
† Collins, Tom (Worcester) (Lab)
† Foody, Emma (Vice-Chamberlain of His Majesty ’ s Household)
† Martin, Mike (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)
† Myer, Luke (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
† Obese-Jecty, Ben (Huntingdon) (Con)
† Opher, Dr Simon (Stroud) (Lab)
† Race, Steve (Exeter) (Lab)
† Reed, David (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
† Roome, Ian (North Devon) (LD)
† Smith, Rebecca (South West Devon) (Con)
† Stainbank, Euan (Falkirk) (Lab)
† Tufnell, Henry (Mid and South Pembrokeshire) (Lab)
† Wrighting, Rosie (Kettering) (Lab)
Susanna Smith, Committee Clerk
† attended the Committee
Fourth Delegated Legislation Committee
Tuesday 1 September 2026
[Christine Jardine in the Chair ]
Draft Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. The purpose of the draft regulations, which were laid before the House on 29 June 2026, is to make consequential amendments to the Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 2015, following amendments introduced through the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025. The draft regulations ensure that the service complaints system remains aligned with primary legislation and continues to operate effectively. The draft regulations introduce two principal amendments. First, they amend the Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 2015 to replace references to the “appropriate officer” with references to the “appropriate person”. That reflects amendments made by the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025 to section 340N of the Armed Forces Act 2006. It clarifies that suitably qualified civilians as well as military personnel may carry out specified administrative functions within the service complaints system. The draft regulations also include a transitional provision to ensure that existing cases continue smoothly when the changes come into force. Overall, the amendments provide greater flexibility and efficiency in the administration of the system, while maintaining existing safeguards and preserving service personnel’s...
The service complaints system is a vital safeguard for members of the armed forces and those who have served. It has been brilliant to be on the Armed Forces Bill Committee over the past year with Members from the Liberal Democrats and many Government Members. It is nice to be able to touch on this in a consensual way, and those on the Government Front Bench will be happy to know that we will not seek to divide the Committee. This statutory instrument gives people who believe that they have been wronged in a matter relating to their service a route to seek redress. Everyone who serves or has served has an interest in a process that is fair, accessible and efficient. There has been progress, but serious pressures still remain; the Armed Forces Bill Committee heard that repeatedly when we visited the service justice unit down in Portsmouth. In her 2025 annual report, the Service Complaints Ombudsman, Mariette Hughes, assessed the system as efficient and effective for the first time, but not yet fair. The report also records that the tri-service timeliness targets were not met, and that staffing problems across all three services hindered progress on cases. The Royal Air Force, in whose outfit the Minister served, illustrates the pressure. Its workforce review identified under-resourcing of all four full-time case management roles. Under the new timeliness measure, 42% of RAF complaints were closed within the 24-week target in 2025, against a 90% target. The average resolution...
I would just like to ratify and concur with what has been said. The explanatory notes say: “A full impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is foreseen.” I agree with the wording and the amendments to the wording, so I am happy to support the instrument.
I will not keep the Committee long. I am very pleased to see the hon. and gallant Gentleman, the Minister, still in post, as this is a policy area that he has cared deeply about throughout his life. I share the broad support for the instrument expressed by the shadow Minister, my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Exmouth and Exeter East. I have only two questions, and I appreciate that the Minister may want to write to me afterwards for clarification; I am perfectly content for him to do so. On paragraph 5.3 of the explanatory memorandum, I would be grateful if he could set out to the Committee, now or subsequently, what the definition of “competent person” is and what that constitutes. I appreciate it may be set out in the 2006 or 2025 primary parent legislation to these draft regulations, but if he can, I would be grateful for a little clarification. Finally, paragraph 10.1 of the explanatory memorandum refers to the legislation being continuously monitored. If the Minister can offer a little more flesh on the bones as to how that monitoring takes place-whether it is by serving officers, his Department or Ministers-I would be grateful. Like my hon. and gallant Friend, I support what the Minister seeks to do with this statutory instrument.
It has been a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine, and I thank Members for their contributions. I welcome the statement from the hon. and gallant Member for Exmouth and Exeter East and the questions from the right hon. Member for Melton and Syston, who is a passionate advocate for service-related matters and for his constituents who have served. It would only be fair for me to write to him with some clarity on the two points he raised, because they are slightly more technical than the actual substance of the draft regulations, which are quite straightforward. As I have set out, the draft regulations make two very simple but consequential amendments to the service complaints system. The first provides greater flexibility, which the hon. and gallant Member for Exmouth and Exeter East spoke about, by allowing suitably qualified civilians as well as military personnel to carry out the specified administrative functions within the service complaints system. The second amendment clarifies that decisions on whether an appeal has been brought on valid grounds cannot themselves be challenged through the service complaints process, supporting the efficient operation of the service complaints system. Together, those amendments ensure that the service complaints regulations remain consistent with the Armed Forces Act 2006, as amended by the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025. Importantly, as we have heard, the amendments do not alter service personnel’s rights, the...
Committee rose.