Nash Riggins criticises the prime minister’s memorial plans in the University of Stirling’s Brig:
Earlier this month, the Prime Minister announced that his government is planning to shell out at least £50m to celebrate the centenary of the First World War, starting in 2014. Over 743,000 British citizens lost their lives in the ‘War to End all Wars’, and the Prime Minister has accordingly pledged to make its commemoration a personal priority. Yet while Mr Cameron is emptying the nation’s coffers to remember the soldiers of yesterday, his government is apparently reluctant to shell out funds to fully equip the soldiers of today.
Last week, the Court of Appeals ruled that the families of two servicemen killed in Iraq have the power to seek monetary compensation from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), due to its negligence in failing to appropriately equip its troops. Unfortunately, this was not the first appeal within the past several years that has addressed the government’s inability to provide its wartime staff with sufficient gear. Previous cases highlight three fatal incidences surrounding Snatch Land Rovers – which are commonly referred to as ‘mobile coffins’ due to their inability to withstand attacks – as well grievous injuries caused by friendly fire that occurred between two tanks.
How then, has the MoD responded? By asserting that all claims of negligence should be discarded due to laws surrounding combat immunity. What’s more, the MoD has gone on to argue that decisions surrounding the ‘proper’ use of equipment should be made at Whitehall; therefore the families of these servicemen should be ineligible to receive compensation…
Full story here.
The hypocrisy of Cameron’s WW1 memorial
Earlier this month, the Prime Minister announced that his government is planning to shell out at least £50m to celebrate the centenary of the First World War, starting in 2014. Over 743,000 British citizens lost their lives in the ‘War to End all Wars’, and the Prime Minister has accordingly pledged to make its commemoration a personal priority. Yet while Mr Cameron is emptying the nation’s coffers to remember the soldiers of yesterday, his government is apparently reluctant to shell out funds to fully equip the soldiers of today.
Last week, the Court of Appeals ruled that the families of two servicemen killed in Iraq have the power to seek monetary compensation from the Ministry of Defence (MoD), due to its negligence in failing to appropriately equip its troops. Unfortunately, this was not the first appeal within the past several years that has addressed the government’s inability to provide its wartime staff with sufficient gear. Previous cases highlight three fatal incidences surrounding Snatch Land Rovers – which are commonly referred to as ‘mobile coffins’ due to their inability to withstand attacks – as well grievous injuries caused by friendly fire that occurred between two tanks.
How then, has the MoD responded? By asserting that all claims of negligence should be discarded due to laws surrounding combat immunity. What’s more, the MoD has gone on to argue that decisions surrounding the ‘proper’ use of equipment should be made at Whitehall; therefore the families of these servicemen should be ineligible to receive compensation…
Full story here.
Share this:
About the author
Editor. Matt is a second-year Philosophy student at the University of Birmingham. He is also a multimedia editor for Redbrick.