§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the reply to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South, Official Report, 23 March, c. 435, what was the name and rank of the senior non-commissioned officer who was severely reprimanded in connection with the accident which disabled Martin Ketterick.
§ Mr. WigginIt is not the practice to disclose the personal details of service personnel who have been summarily disciplined.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the reply to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South, Official Report, 23 March, c. 435, what was the charge against the senior non-commissioned officer who was severely reprimanded in connection with the accident which disabled Martin Ketterick.
§ Mr. WigginI have nothing to add to my reply to the right hon. Member of 23 March.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence why a regimental inquiry into the accident which seriously injured Martin Ketterick was convened in his absence; and if any further inquiry was considered after he had left hospital.
§ Mr. WigginA regimental inquiry is required to complete its investigations and make recommendations as soon as possible. In the case of Corporal Ketterick, the inquiry visited him in hospital and, having obtained his evidence, completed its investigations.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the reply to the right hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent South, OfficialReport, 23 March, c. 435, if, in relation to the inquiry into the circumstances of the accident which disabled Martin Ketterick, he will publish information on the method of inquiry, the position and rank of the adjudicators, the number and nature of the witnesses, whether Martin Ketterick gave written evidence, the conclusions of the inquiry, the people to whom the inquiry reported, and any subsequent action taken.
§ Mr. WigginThe regimental inquiry is a statutory form of Service investigation conducted in pursuance of and in accordance with section 137 of the Army Act 1955 and the Regimental Inquiry Rules 1956. The inquiry consisted of310W a captain and a lieutenant of the Royal Marines who were assisted by a specialist adviser, conversant with all climbing techniques and experienced in abseiling procedures. In the course of the inquiry they took oral and written evidence from eight witnesses, who included Corporal Ketterick.
They concluded that there was an error of judgment by the instructor in positioning himself by the anchor point and it recommended that in future instructors should personally check that the rope is clear before cutting it. This check would include, visually sighting the man at the bottom, confirmation from the bottom by voice/radio and physical pulling of the rope on at least three occasions.
The report was considered by the commanding officer 45 Commando Group, Major-General Royal Marine Commando Forces and the Commandant-General Royal Marines. The inquiry's findings and recommendations were accepted by these authorities and procedures were revised to implement the recommendation of personal checks by the instructor, prior to cutting the rope.