LGBT Veterans: Financial Redress Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Defence

LGBT Veterans: Financial Redress

Lord Cashman Excerpts
Thursday 21st March 2024

(8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Lord Cashman Portrait Lord Cashman
- Hansard - -

To ask His Majesty’s Government when they expect to have implemented Lord Etherton’s recommendations on financial redress in the LGBT veterans independent review.

Earl of Minto Portrait The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (The Earl of Minto) (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, defence has accepted the recommendation of a financial award, as proposed by the notable review from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Etherton, and is working with experts across government to establish an appropriate scheme, acknowledging that the process is intricate. Defence is committed to maintaining the momentum of the review and honouring all commitments made in the Government’s response, published in December 2023. Work continues to deliver the financial scheme by the end of 2024, and I commit to updating the House on the design of the scheme before the Summer Recess.

Lord Cashman Portrait Lord Cashman (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that response. This country’s treatment of LGBT armed services personnel has indeed been shameful, and the longer it takes to implement the financial elements of the report from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Etherton, the worse it gets. The Government have had the report for a long time. They accepted it in July, but we still have no financial redress for these veterans, whose careers were ruined, whose employment prospects were damaged and whose service pensions and benefits were denied. Many are now in their senior years and living in hardship. Therefore, I ask the Government at the very least to commit to an operational date for the financial redress scheme and, if they cannot do that, to update the House, as the Minister has said, at least within three months of this Question.

Earl of Minto Portrait The Earl of Minto (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I certainly commit to updating the House on that latter point. I think all sides are vigorously agreed on this important issue: the treatment of LGBT serving personnel between 1967 and 2000 was wholly, wholly unacceptable. There is just no question about that. But the situation today is very different, and we are trying to address the wrongs of the past as rapidly and practically as we can. We are working across government to deliver all 49 recommendations as effectively, practically and expeditiously as possible.

--- Later in debate ---
Earl of Minto Portrait The Earl of Minto (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, when it comes down to it, it must be on a case-by-case basis, because a lot of the information that we have available to check and re-check exactly who has been so badly dealt with is either missing or not particularly accurate. I say again that anybody who has any interest in this should apply on the “LGBT veterans: support and next steps” page on GOV.UK. So far, we have only had just over 400 applications, which is less than we thought. We really want to make certain that this is absolutely comprehensive and that everybody gets paid—and all the other restorative measures, which are just as important, are taken—as quickly and practically as possible.

Lord Cashman Portrait Lord Cashman (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, it is commendable that 26 recommendations have been adopted, but does the Minister agree that, without the financial element, it could be seen as window dressing? Difficult though it is, the Canadian Government turned around a much larger scheme with a much larger cohort within four months of receiving their report. I am mystified as to why the MoD cannot do the same.

Earl of Minto Portrait The Earl of Minto (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Canadian example is apposite but very different. The Canadian Government took a very clear administrative approach, which addressed a specific number of people, where they already had the information. We are not in that position, and it is important that we catch everybody who is likely to be affected, to make certain that justice and the right thing are done.