A series of Ofsted inspections on Army Apprenticeships conducted in 2013 rated the overall effectiveness as good. This was an improvement over the last inspection in 2009, rated as satisfactory (now called 'requires improvement'). Some 28 per cent of Army recruits were less than 18 years of age. Further information is needed on why the Army is so dependent on recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years compared to the other two Services, and whether steps are being taken to reduce this dependency. Of those recruited in 2012, 3.5 per cent of the Army were rated at entry level 2 for literacy (that of a 7 to 8 year old) and 39 per cent had a literacy level of an eleven year old. If as the MoD states, it has to recruit personnel at whatever level of attainment is available, then it should boost remedial action when recruitment entry standards are particularly low. In light of changes brought about by Future Force 2020, it may be that recruiting personnel with higher levels of attainment would better meet the future needs of the Armed Forces. Whilst the Committee recognises that some recruits may not be eager to take further academic exams, the MoD should encourage more recruits to undertake English and Maths GCSEs which would stand them in good stead for future employment. The MoD has carried out some useful pilot projects with paramedic training and should identify more potential projects to ensure that vital skills paid for by the MoD are not lost to the country

The Government must show how the excellent medical care being delivered to injured service personnel will continue long after the memory of the Afghan Operation fades. This report, which gives praise to the first class medical treatment provided for the Armed Forces, questions whether the support for injured personnel will be sustainable over the long term. In particular, the committee is concerned about the number of people who may go on to develop severe and life-limiting, physical, mental health, alcohol or neurological problems. There is still a question mark over whether the Government as a whole fully understands the likely future demands and related costs

Evidence given to the Committee showed that Armed Forces personnel and their families valued accommodation very highly and saw it as part of their terms and conditions of employment and as promoting unit cohesion and support for families when personnel were deployed on operations. The provision of accommodation was particularly important for those who were required to be mobile; it was the only option allowing families to live together. It is also clear that for many personnel, Service Families Accommodation is the only affordable housing solution. Indeed, the Families Federation said that inquiries and complaints about accommodation account for more than half of the regular communications they receive. So when the Committee considered the MoD's decision to halt upgrade work on accommodation for the next three years, they saw it as damaging to the Covenant and recommended that the MoD look again urgently at the stoppage, which, in any case, could well be a false economy. In early 2012, the MoD began work on the New Employment Model, looking at how Armed Forces personnel are employed. One element of this is the Future Accommodation. The Committee recommends that this project should be sufficiently flexible to meet the needs of the three individual Services by allowing sufficient variation to meet their differing needs. They should also take account of the needs of personnel at different stages in their lives and careers. Given the fragility of morale we recommend that the MoD should use a more effective communications strategy to keep Service families in the picture

The Military Covenant states that in exchange for their military service and their willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice, soldiers should receive the nation’s support. Exploring the concept’s invention by the Army in the late 1990s, its migration to the civilian sphere from 2006 and its subsequent entrenchment in public policy, Ingham seeks to understand the Covenant’s progress from the esoteric confines of Army doctrine to national recognition. Drawing on interviews with senior commanders, policy-makers and representatives of Forces’ charities, this study highlights how the Army deployed the Military Covenant to convey the pressure on the institution caused by the concurrent combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. While achieving a better deal for soldiers whose sacrifice became all too apparent, the Military Covenant licensed unprecedented incursion into politics by senior commanders, enabling them to out-manoeuvre the Blair-Brown governments and to challenge the existing norms within Britain’s civil-military relationship. As British Forces prepare to leave Afghanistan, this study considers the value Britain accords to military service and whether civilian society will continue to uphold its Covenant with those who have served the nation.

In this report the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee says the UK Government must identify any shortfalls in the provision of services to the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland, and report on how these will be met. The Committee also calls for closer engagement between the UK Government and Northern Ireland Executive on support for the Armed Forces Community. The inquiry found that due to devolution, variations exist across the regions of the UK as to how health, housing and education services are provided. There are some specific benefits for the armed forces community that exist in Great Britain but are not available in Northern Ireland, such as improved access to IVF treatment, priority in accessing NHS healthcare, additional priority in accessing social housing, and certain educational entitlements.

In 1950, when he commissioned the first edition of The Armed Forces Officer, Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall told its author, S.L.A. Marshall, that "American military officers, of whatever service, should share common ground ethically and morally." In this new edition, the authors methodically explore that common ground, reflecting on the basics of the Profession of Arms, and the officer's special place and distinctive obligations within that profession and especially to the Constitution.

It is widely observed that the study of war has been paid limited attention within criminology. This is intellectually curious given that acts of war have occurred persistently throughout history and perpetuate criminal acts, victimisation and human rights violations on a scale unprecedented with domestic levels of crime. However, there are authoritative voices within criminology who have been studying war from the borders of the discipline. This book contains a selection of criminological authors who have been authoritatively engaged in studying criminology and war. Following an introduction that ‘places war within criminology’ the collection is arranged across three themed sections including: Theorising War, Law and Crime; Linking War and Criminal Justice; and War, Sexual Violence and Visual Trauma. Each chapter takes substantive topics within criminology and victimology (i.e. corporate crime, history, imprisonment, criminal justice, sexual violence, trauma, security and crime control to name but a few) and invites the reader to engage in critical discussions relating to wars both past and present. The chapters within this collection are theoretically rich, empirically diverse and come together to create the first authoritative published collection of original essays specifically dedicated to criminology and war. Students and researchers alike interested in war, critical criminology and victimology will find this an accessible study companion that centres the disparate criminological attention to war into one comprehensive collection.

How the MoD has broken the covenant with the military over the past 25 years; an informal agreement that is underpinned by a promise to provide 'adequate safeguards'.

Contains the 4th session of the 28th Parliament through the session of the Parliament.

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