The Senior Deputy Speaker<p>I have not received any formal complaints from members, their staff or House staff but under neither the current system nor the proposed future system would complaints come to me. Currently complaints may be received by the House Administration, the Commissioner for Standards, any of the political parties or whips, or the Convenor of the Crossbench Peers.</p><p> </p><p>Complaints of bullying or harassment by members of the House of Lords may be made to the Commissioner for Standards. Consideration of complaints by the Commissioner follows a two stage process. The Commissioner conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether there is evidence sufficient to establish a prima facie case that the Code has been breached. This stage of the process is confidential, known only to the Commissioner, complainant and respondent. Basic details of cases are made public only if a complaint proceeds to the second stage, which is a formal investigation.</p><p> </p><p>When I launched the consultation on 11 February there were no live formal investigations by the Commissioner solely in relation to the Code’s personal honour provision, which is the only aspect of the Code likely to be engaged by complaints of bullying and harassment. No such investigations have been initiated since the consultation was launched.</p><p> </p><p>Furthermore, no formal complaints relating to the behaviour of House of Lords members were being dealt with by the Administration when the consultation was launched, and none have been initiated since.</p><p> </p>Lord McFall of Alcluith2019-02-25HL13693false2019-02-25T17:14:53.403Z204Senior Deputy Speaker (HoL)2019-02-14Peers: Bullying2House of LordsTo ask the Senior Deputy Speaker how many formal complaints of bullying or harassment by any member of the House of Lords were being investigated from (1) members, (2) their staff, or (3) House staff at the time he launched the consultation on the implementation of a new process for investigating complaints of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct on 11 February.falseLord Foulkes of CumnockHL13729Ministry of Defence<p>There was a Fatal Accident Inquiry (FAI) carried out following the crash of a Chinook in June 1994 on the Mull of Kintyre which concluded it was impossible to establish the exact cause of the crash.</p><p> </p><p>Since the formation of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) Inquest Unit (DIU) in 2008 there have been no FAIs. Before the formation of the DIU, Inquests were dealt with by the individual Services (Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force), the DIU does not have access to any records that may have been retained from this period. It is, however, unlikely that these records have been retained under the MOD records retention policy which is normally five years from date of opening.</p><p> </p><p>We have held discussions with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscals Service (COPFS), to determine if there any other FAIs have been held. COPFS have advised it is not possible to confirm how many FAIs have taken place into military deaths in Scotland since 1990. The COPFS database is based on individual specific information i.e. name, date of birth, date of death and not on occupation. It is not searchable on occupation and we are advised that any search would also return deaths of individuals from natural causes, which could amount to many hundreds of records and would need to be manually searched. This information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.</p>Earl Howe2019-02-25false2019-02-25T15:48:37.61Z11DefenceDefence2019-02-14Armed Forces: Casualties2House of LordsTo ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 7 February (HL13095), whether a Fatal Accident Inquiry was carried out into any of those deaths; and if so, which.falseLord Foulkes of CumnockHL13730Ministry of Defence<p>The protocol for liaison on Fatal Accident Inquiries (FAIs) relates to fatalities of Armed Forces personnel outside the United Kingdom (the protocol) and is shared between the Ministry of Justice (for the Chief Coroner's Office), the Ministry of Defence (Armed Forces Personnel), and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS).</p><p> </p><p>The protocol was originally drafted and agreed on 31 August 2012; it was subsequently revised on 25 May 2017 following consultations between the parties. The Ministry of Defence put forward further revisions. Further work on the protocol was delayed due to the Ministry of Justice not being able to provide feedback due to being overwhelmed with the terrorist events in London and they have not been in a position to consider the protocol further. Further consultations on the protocol have not been able to be held due to time commitments by the other parties. COPFS have advised that as part of a modernisation project, they plan to revitalise the discussions on the protocol in the near future. These discussions will now include the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.</p><p> </p><p>The protocol must be owned by all parties as it is a tripartite agreement. The protocol is a draft document until full agreement is achieved by all the parties, and cannot be published at this time.</p><p> </p>Earl Howe2019-02-27false2019-02-27T15:20:15.427Z11DefenceDefence2019-02-14Armed Forces: Death2House of LordsTo ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will publish the pre- and post-section 104 order protocols between the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Defence, the Scottish Government Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and the Chief Coroner on dealing with military deaths in Scotland.falseLord Foulkes of CumnockHL1373110013