(2 days, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI have always said that we train people to join the military and to be in the military, but we do not necessarily train them to be a civilian after they leave. That is why this Government have taken swift action to support veterans upon leaving. Last month I launched Operation Ascend, which will help veterans thrive into post-service careers. Our hugely successful career transition partnership has now seen 88% of all veterans leaving straight into employment since October. We have extended national insurance contributions relief from April 2026 for employers who recruit veterans. On top of that, this Government have awarded £3.7 million in veterans housing grants. I am a firm believer that over the past 14 years we did not take enough responsibility for supporting our veterans, and plans that we will unveil in the future will take a step in the right direction to improving that.
I recently visited the Heyford and Bicester veterans group in my constituency, which was set up by Ian Ridley to support fellow veterans throughout the region. This fantastic initiative brings together a range of services from charities, the NHS and local authorities to support veterans. However, when speaking to Ian, I was amazed to discover that the group receives no funding from the MOD, and that veterans in our region are not signposted to its services when they leave the armed forces. I therefore invite the Minister to visit the group with me and see the work that it does, so that we can discuss how to make it more routine for services such as those that it offers to be made available to our fantastic veterans.
I thank all the people, most of whom are probably volunteers, who are supporting veterans in the hon. Member’s constituency. Two days ago I visited another tri-service veterans hub that is delivering, I think, exactly the same types of services. We often find that while there is a great deal support out there, it is difficult for veterans to navigate the process of finding the right place, and we are working on plans to help them with that.
Harrogate is a proud armed forces town and the location of the Army Foundation College, and Menwith Hill and Catterick are nearby. North Yorkshire as a whole plays an important part for our armed forces. Veterans in my constituency have told me that they often move back there after postings throughout their careers, but they then have problems accessing housing through the local authority. What conversations is the Minister having with local government colleagues to ensure that local authorities have a better understanding of how to listen to what veterans say about the adaptations they need?
As the hon. Member knows very well, access to social and affordable housing is a severe problem across the country. We work with many councils, explaining to them the covenant as a whole and the need for veterans to be fast-tracked. Op Fortitude is a prime example: there have been 3,000 referrals, and 825 veterans have been put into housing in a relatively short time. I would like to connect the hon. Member with that operation to ensure that we can point any veterans who need such support in the right direction.
I visited Richard, a veteran, in his home, provided by the Derventio Housing Trust. The trust, based in Derby, offers homes for people without them, including those who have served in our armed forces. Volunteers from Derventio recently renovated a house in the city specifically for veterans. Does the Minister agree that such support is vital, and will he tell us what the Government are doing to help with the provision of housing, care and support for our veterans in need?
I congratulate the individuals in that trust on supporting the veterans in my hon. Friend’s constituency. I have visited many different parts of the UK and observed the phenomenal volunteer support that veterans often have to rely on. We want to establish a structure that will focus that support and also direct veterans to the help that they need more quickly and effectively, and we will unveil our plans in due course.
Will the Minister meet me, and other members of the all-party parliamentary group for the armed forces, to discuss rolling out the best practice of some fire authorities to give those who have served our country automatic interviews for relevant roles in the public sector? It is a brilliant idea that would really benefit my constituents, and I think that all those who have gone above and beyond to serve our country should be served by all of us upon their return.
That is a great initiative. Service beyond service is something that we should be promoting, and I will take that as best practice, have a look at it and see whether we can roll it out across the nation, so that when people leave the military they can secure at least a first interview for a role in the fire service, the police, the NHS or any other public services.
Veterans who served in Northern Ireland will no doubt welcome the Veterans Minister’s decision—first suggested by the shadow Defence Secretary—that the MOD should judicially review the recent coroner’s verdict regarding the shooting of several IRA terrorists at Clonoe. Well done, I say, but why not go further to protect veterans, and drop the plans to revoke large parts of the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, which would only serve to facilitate yet more inquests of this type?
The right hon. Member makes an important point. Having visited Northern Ireland just two weeks ago, I share the concerns of many veterans who have served in Northern Ireland, particularly concerns about the misinterpretation of the challenging context in which many of these inquests and inquiries are taking place. I remind Members on both sides of the House that not so long ago, in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s, there were major explosions in every major city in the United Kingdom and assassinations across the UK. Killings were a regular event in Northern Ireland, and we sent our service personnel there to protect peace, save lives and, indeed, prevent a civil war.
The Minister mentioned both sides of the House. Revoking the legacy Act would encourage a system of two-tier justice—one for our Army veterans and another for alleged IRA terrorists, including those given so-called letters of comfort by the Blair regime. With many of those veterans having served in proud regiments that traditionally recruited from red wall northern constituencies, why should a Labour Government assist Gerry Adams to sue the British taxpayer? How is that supporting those who served their country valiantly on Operation Banner?
Let us be absolutely clear: the right hon. Gentleman is looking at an individual who served his country on Operation Banner, so I understand the issues for all our veterans and I have been working very hard with the Northern Ireland Office to make sure that veterans’ welfare and legal services are provided, so that anyone involved in any of the investigations gets the support they require and that we can minimise the impact on what is quite a unique group of elderly veterans.
Over the last 24 years, I have had the absolute privilege of working with amazing servicewomen across the armed forces, and also with women in the police, the NHS and, of course, our intelligence service. There is no place for unacceptable behaviours in defence—absolutely no place at all—and the women who choose to serve deserve better.
This Government are taking action. Just last week, I announced the launch of the long called for tri-service complaints unit, which will sit outside the chain of command. The single services will therefore not be able to, nor be perceived to be able to, mark their own homework. I am working across Government, in particular with the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), and the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), on setting up a defence violence against women and girls taskforce. Just two weeks ago, I met the Women’s Network, and I have also sat on the Raising our Standards panel of those from across trade and other organisations, the purpose of which is to really criticise us and pull forward any lessons learned from broader society.
I thank the Minister for his response, and for the work he has done. The 2024 armed forces continuous attitude survey reported that 13% of female personnel had experienced sexual harassment in service during the prior 12 months, and many women have said they would not report an incident due to fear of the consequences. The recently announced tri-service scheme is welcome, but what steps is he taking to make it genuinely independent to ensure women’s confidence in the scheme and their safety while serving in the armed forces?
There are two principal elements. The tri-service complaints system sits outside the chain of command, and when certain issues hit a threshold, they will be taken away from the single services, so the system will be completely independent. The second is the violence against women and girls taskforce that we have created, which will work directly to me. It will be a small team at my level, but it will have tentacles right down into the single services. It will provide a safe space for women to go to if they want to raise an issue or a complaint, which can then be transferred into the complaints system or, indeed, in parallel all the way up to me so that I can take action directly.
I thank the Minister, and I welcome the measures announced last week. My constituents in Monmouthshire and people across Wales would be interested to hear more from the Minister about the new violence against women and girls taskforce, and the regional and national champions. How will they ensure that everyone who serves in the armed forces can do so in safety?
I refer my hon. Friend to my answer to the last question. The violence against women and girls taskforce is taking best practice from the rest of Government and ensuring that it is replicated in defence, but it is actually going one step further and putting a structure in place. As I always say, I was very young when I joined the Marines, and I was caught up in this hierarchical situation. Where do you go to make a complaint? You don’t actually have anywhere to go to make a complaint. The taskforce will provide a safe space, so that if people want to pop out of the chain of command to highlight a concern, it can be elevated quickly and dealt with rapidly.
I welcome the creation of the violence against women and girls taskforce, which is an important step towards enabling complaints to be heard and addressed outside the chain of command, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for raising this important issue. Like the taskforce, the Government have committed to a new veterans strategy focusing specifically on the experience of women who have left the service. Will the Minister outline the timescale for the development and implementation of that strategy, given how vital it is that women come and serve in the armed forces, and that they feel safe and secure in doing so?
As part of our future veterans strategy, a women veterans annexe will provide specific guidance on females wanting to leave the armed forces. It is also important to mention that we are not just setting up the violence against women and girls taskforce; we have the sexual harassment survey going out, the tri-service complaints system, the review of our zero-tolerance policy by a KC to move to 100% action, an international culture and behaviours conference to learn best lessons from our international partners, and the modernisation of our military appraisal system to ensure that people who get involved in unacceptable behaviour are tracked through the system so they can be held to account.
As I mentioned earlier, we are moving forward with our women and girls taskforce to drive progress on the Government’s commitment to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. Last year, we launched the Ministry of Defence’s domestic abuse action plan and trained more than 700 service police in specialist domestic abuse and coercive control training, and now everybody in the military—every man and woman across the armed forces—goes through unacceptable sexual behaviour training.
According to King’s College London, one in 10 of our armed forces personnel is a survivor of domestic abuse, but, because there is no specific offence of domestic abuse in the law, the Ministry of Justice has confirmed that it cannot comprehensively identify perpetrators, and cannot therefore comprehensively rehabilitate them and keep victims and survivors safe. Will the Minister join me and colleagues across the House in campaigning for a specific offence of domestic abuse in the law so that we can better protect our armed forces personnel from domestic abuse?
It is completely clear to me that any sort of domestic abuse in any way, shape or form in the armed forces is completely unacceptable. If we can help to address and track some of that through the armed forces, it will make it far easier to deal with and ensure rehabilitation. I will take this conversation on after these questions.
I have visited multiple cadet units all over the country and have been truly astounded at the social mobility that the cadets provides for a whole range of young people. We have over 140,000 cadets at the moment, supported by 26,000 volunteers. We are doing everything we can to look to expand those programmes over time and ensure that the opportunity is available for everybody, from every walk of life.
In my new role as the chair of the British Shooting Sports Council, I take a keen interest in cadet target rifle shooting. The Minister will be aware that the Ministry of Defence is proposing to withdraw from service the 7.62 cadet target rifle from 2026, and the .22 rifle just two years later. Aside from depriving cadets from the opportunity to learn the highly disciplined and valuable skills of firearms safety and use, the proposal calls into question the future of target rifle shooting in the UK. Will the Minister meet me and representatives of the shooting and target rifle community to discuss opportunities to reverse this decision?
I will happily come and talk through that in due course. I have been in the military for 24 years and have spent a lot of time shooting, and I can see its benefits.
That is a really valid question. We pay out more than £1.5 billion a year in compensation through the armed forces compensation scheme and the war pension scheme. If the hon. Member wants to write to me on that specific case, I can have a look into it. I also refer her to Op Courage, which is linked to mental health and has had 34,000 referrals to date.
Does the Minister agree that expanding our military expenditure creates a golden opportunity to deal with the shortage of people going into science, technology and engineering jobs, and that as we expand the military budget, we should make sure that the defence industry expands the number of apprenticeships and builds a robust skills and training base so that young people can benefit from those jobs?
We are incredibly proud of our veterans in Peterborough. Will the Minister join me in recognising the work of Councillor Jason McNally, our armed forces champion, and his predecessor, Councillor John Fox, and tell us what more the Government can do to help them to support more people signing up to the armed forces covenant?
I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting two amazing individuals who I imagine are putting a huge number of hours into supporting the veterans community and the armed forces community. The covenant will come into law in 2026, and when it does, we need to ensure that those armed forces champions understand what it provides at local level and can harness its benefits for the whole of the armed forces.
Those who bravely serve in our forces should never lose their say in our country’s future, so I welcome the Government’s swift action to introduce the ability to use the veterans ID card as voter ID. May I ask the Minister what plans there are to ensure that veterans around the country are aware of this important change?
The veterans ID card is a fantastic initiative that has now been rolled out for most veterans. We have thousands of applications a week and will continue to endeavour to ensure that they get delivered in the most timely and effective manner. Anybody who is interested in veterans’ welfare issues or the services available should go to the gov.uk website and type in “veterans support”, and there will be a plethora of different avenues for them to unlock.
I have a number of nuclear veterans in my Na h-Eileanan an Iar constituency, as many colleagues do in their constituencies. What steps are Ministers taking to meet veterans, acknowledge their service and deal with the consequences of their service and their exposure to nuclear material?
I have met nuclear test veterans from two of the main charities, and I will continue to do so regularly to ensure that there is continuity of engagement. We have promised to do two things. One is a full and thorough review of the records—not a stovepiped look, but a whole review. That will take a bit of time, but we will do that in a thorough manner. The second is consistent engagement to ensure that people are informed of our progress.
Staff Sergeant Peter Cluff died in February 2016, with an in-service designation to that death. His widow, Kirsty, and his children, Meredith and Heather, were in the benefit of the armed forces pension scheme and remain so. However, the scheme made a miscalculation and have sent debt collectors to them to try to recover a fairly small sum. I asked about the matter three months ago and have not had a response from the Department. Will the Secretary of State or one of his Ministers meet me to discuss this unedifying advert for the Ministry of Defence?
That is a truly harrowing story. I will absolutely take that on, and we will meet straight after this and get it solved.
The recent report “A Dark Shadow” shone a light on the link between sexual assault and suicidal ideation in the military community. I was therefore pleased to see the announcement from the MOD last week about the removal of sexual harassment investigations from the chain of command—something for which campaigners and survivors have campaigned for such a long time. They are also keen to have reassurance, however. Will the Minister confirm that this is not a continuation of the previous Government’s failed efforts, but a step change in making the process truly independent?
This absolutely is a step change. A tri-service complaints system, removed from the single services, has been called for for a long time. We have taken decisive action to do that, and it will move things in the right direction. Combine that with the violence against women and girls taskforce, and we are double-tapping to ensure that we have the best support for women and, indeed, anyone else in the armed forces.
Concerns have been growing over China’s aggression in the Indo-Pacific region. Given the strategic importance of the Taiwan strait to global security, what has been the Department’s response to those rising tensions?
On Friday I was pleased to join colleagues from across the House to hear the Royal Marines band service in concert as part of the Mountbatten festival of music. May I invite the Government to reaffirm their commitment to the Royal Marines band service? It makes a huge contribution to defence diplomacy and combat operations.
That is a great question. The Royal Marine band service is the best band service in our armed forces, and it is absolutely safe under our watch. It provides a fantastic influence opportunity, as well as essential military services outside the musical profession.
The Defence Secretary should know that the whole House supports the Government’s actions to preserve peace in Ukraine, but that was not the point that the shadow Secretary of State was making. He was asking whether the Ministry of Defence recognises that it has a duty of care towards soldiers who fight for their country and then face decades of lawfare and the misuse of the European convention on human rights. Will the Ministry do something to protect those soldiers?
(1 month ago)
Written StatementsI am pleased to place in the Library of the House today the Ministry of Defence’s formal response to the Service Police Complaints Commissioner’s annual report for 2023.
The Commissioner’s inaugural report assesses the delivery of her functions and the work of her office in 2023. The response sets out the MOD’s comments on the report and approach to each of the three recommendations made by the Commissioner.
The MOD values the strong independent oversight that the Commissioner brings to the Service Police complaints process and is committed to having a system that our personnel can have trust and confidence in.
Attachments can be viewed online at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2025-02-25/HCWS467
[HCWS467]
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat) for his important question. He has my absolute assurance that if anyone dies in service, from training all the way through to combat and operations, they will absolutely be exempt from inheritance tax provisions. I will continue to discuss that issue, as well as many others to do with armed forces pay, with my opposite number in the Treasury. This Government are deeply proud of the armed forces, and I am deeply proud of them. They will have my full backing as we move forward.
First of all, I place on record my full congratulations to the hon. and gallant Member for his recent award in the new year’s honours. That is a fantastic achievement for somebody for whom I have the greatest admiration, and with whom I have served in numerous fields. May I raise the problem with his answer, however? Retention in the armed forces is already suffering; numbers are already coming down and people are struggling to make the maths add up between serving today and having a future tomorrow. The problem with these arguments and the lack of clarity from the Government is that too many people are making decisions on which we all need them to think again. We need people to serve and stay, and it is his responsibility to keep them there.
I thank the right hon. and gallant Member for his response. We need to take a holistic view of this. I remind him that we have missed every recruitment and retention target for the past 14 years. We are working really hard to get after that now: we have just put in place wraparound welfare, we have done the Annington Homes deal, we have put additional resources into veterans’ homes for after service, and we have given the biggest pay rise in 20 years. We are working really hard on that, in discussions with our Treasury counterparts, and we will move it forward.
Will the Minister give an assurance that the proposed changes to the application of inheritance tax to certain armed forces death-in-service payments are compatible with the commitment in the armed forces covenant to ensuring that our brave and loyal armed forces personnel
“face no disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services”—
yes or no?
The covenant will come into law in the next two years or so, on the back of the armed forces Bill. That will result in a great expansion, with all Government Departments falling in line with the covenant, so that no individual who has served is disadvantaged because of that service.
The Forces Pension Society has already stated that levying inheritance tax on death-in-service benefits would be wholly counter to the armed forces covenant, and we Conservatives wholly agree. The consultation by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs on that proposal closed on 22 January. On what day did the MOD submit its response to that key consultation—presumably in defence of service families’ interests—and will the Minister place a copy of that response in the Library?
May I remind the right hon. Member of my service, and of the fact that I will in no way, shape or form take this for granted? I am putting all my effort into those discussions at the moment. My officials have discussed that with the Treasury, I have discussed it with the Treasury, and we will continue to discuss such issues with the Treasury to ensure that our armed forces personnel get the deal that they deserve.
I commend the Minister on his Distinguished Service Order—we all do—but in answer to a parliamentary question, we were told:
“The Ministry of Defence has not made a formal response to HM Revenue and Customs’ technical consultation.”
It really should have done. Who in their right mind would soldier for a Government who do not have their back, whether on school fees, lawfare or inheritance tax, or worse, do not have the back of their family if they die unmarried and in service?
Scoring political points on the back of armed forces families is unacceptable. This is a public consultation, and it is not the Government’s responsibility to answer it. We have discussed this Department to Department, from both an official perspective and a ministerial perspective, and we will continue to do so. We will bring this to a close.
Why do we support a more diverse military? It is simple: it makes us better, it makes us think differently and, importantly, it means the military represents the society we are trying to protect. Since coming into government, we have launched our Raising our Standards programme. We are seeking to make Defence the most attractive employer for all walks of society. I will be unequivocally clear that the underlying principle for why we pursue a more diverse military, better welfare, better housing, and better kit and equipment, is simply to ensure that we can call upon our men and women to do their job and that they can close with the enemy and win.
In 2019, the Wigston review identified that serving personnel from ethnic minority backgrounds are subject to higher levels of harassment and bullying than their white British counterparts. Given the recent success of the Atherton review, which cast light on the structural challenges faced by women in the armed forces, and given that 16% of the British Army workforce comes from ethnic minority groups, does the ministerial team think it might be time to have an Atherton-style review, independent of the MOD, into the challenges faced by ethnic minority groups to ensure and enhance recruitment, retention and promotional opportunities?
I thank the hon. Member for his useful comments. We have launched our Raising our Standards programme, which will take standards from where they were and raise them. We will make Defence the most inclusive career and, indeed, the most rewarding for any part of society to join. The Defence Committee will hold us to account on some of that. When the covenant comes into place, that will also cover certain elements of standards, too.
Recent weeks have seen troubling headlines for LGBT personnel, and we on the Lib Dem Benches believe that everyone is welcome in our armed forces, regardless of their sexual orientation, ethnicity or gender identity. Can the Minister outline what steps have been taken to promote the British values of inclusion, particularly for the LGBT community, among our NATO allies? Will the Minister provide an update on the compensation scheme for LGBT veterans who were impacted by the military’s anti-gay ban?
When we started the Etherton review, a lot of engagement went out across some of our NATO allies to take best practice. Now that we have launched the programme, we are also making sure that people can understand the successes and perhaps some of the improvements as it progresses. As the House will know, the Defence Secretary announced our findings from the Etherton review on 12 December, with a 50% increase in the financial redress system for those affected by the LGBT ban. Things are now heading in the right direction, with more than 500 people starting the application process.
I reassure the hon. Member that I work closely with my Northern Ireland, Welsh and Scottish commissioners. We are currently looking at the structures by which we support veterans across the whole tapestry of the United Kingdom, and we really want to put in place an institutional resilience system that gives the best care at the right time and in the right place to the right people. That primarily involves working with thousands of charities collaboratively and coherently to ensure that we can get the best bang for our buck from all the amazing volunteers and charitable services out there. A bigger review is going on. It is on hold at the moment, and we will let the House know more in due course.
I am proud that my constituency of South Northamptonshire hosts the largest armed forces gathering of its kind in the UK. The national transition event at Silverstone on 24 February, now in its sixth year, is run by the charities Mission Motorsport and Mission Community. The event recognises, demonstrates and celebrates the value of our veterans and armed forces community. As the Secretary of State develops the veterans strategy, are community-led approaches such as this part of the Department’s thinking, and how might we support such organisations in their work?
Absolutely. I just travelled to the north-east of England and hit three different councils, looking at the different ways in which they deal with the veterans issue. I am really looking forward to the launch event, which will have a variety of different race cars. I just hope that I do not get to see the mudflaps when I am there.
There is a long-standing deal with other nations on the welfare of families and so on. This Government are supporting our armed forces community. We will pay 90% through the CEA. We have given service personnel the biggest pay rise, and we are addressing the recruitment and retention crisis that we were left with.
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. The visit to Redditch was truly enlightening; the charitable sector there is doing amazing work to support veterans in his constituency. I fully champion the breakfast clubs they are putting on.
National resilience and defence in depth is essential as we move forward, when the threat is transferred from non-state actors to state actors across the globe. When the strategic defence review comes out in the next couple of the months—in the spring—Members will see that that is a central tenet throughout.
Last week, the Gurkha class of 2025 proudly attested in Pokhara. There is one part of the British armed forces that does not yet have women: the Brigade of Gurkhas. Will Ministers do what—sadly, and not for the want of trying—I failed to do, and rectify that omission?
I served with the Gurkhas on various tours in Afghanistan and across the world. They are some of the best forces we have, and they do a fantastic job upholding the freedoms we enjoy. I will continue to work with the Gurkhas, and I look forward to meeting their ambassador here very soon to discuss issues such as this.
We just talked about resilience and defence in depth. The cadets provide an example of where we can bring society and defence together to help people understand the benefits of defence. It gives them some great examples, from courage to commitment, dedication, drive and, indeed, becoming a net contributor to society. I fully support it.
Are the Government doing any forward thinking—[Laughter.] No, I am being serious—about what will happen when the shooting stops with a ceasefire agreement in Ukraine? Wherever the border between free and occupied Ukraine finally forms will become the new frontline for Europe, so what provision are we making, even now, to be able to secure the future shape and safety of Europe?
On Thursday, my hon. and gallant Friend the Minister for Veterans and People came to my constituency for an important discussion on veterans’ mental health. May I ask him for his reflections on that discussion and on what actions he will be taking moving forward?
First of all, I thank my hon. Friend for hosting a fantastic get-together with veterans, bereaved families and the charitable sector. I learned a huge amount from the visit. I looked again at how councils are delivering support to veterans, which I can contrast and compare with other visits, and will come out with a plan in due course.
The Secretary of State will have heard the exchanges earlier about the grave injustice and slur that was delivered upon SAS personnel in the coroner’s judgment last week, following the incidents in Clonoe. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to indicate not only to the House but to service personnel and the nation that he, as Defence Secretary, supports those who bravely served in Northern Ireland and stood on the precipice between peace and tyranny?
My constituent Owen was medically discharged from the Army after 17 years of service. Since then, he has been waiting for two years for a resolution of his claim under the armed forces compensation scheme. Does the Minister agree that that is too long to make a veteran wait, and what advice can he give me so that I can resolve my constituent’s case?
We are absolutely a Government who support veterans. If the hon. Gentleman will send me the details of that case, I will look into it personally. We pay out over £1 billion in compensation, and I have been to Norcross to ensure best standards up there.
I recently visited the Royal Orthopaedic hospital in my constituency, which has an outstanding veterans’ care service. Does the Minister agree that it is essential for former and current service personnel in Birmingham and beyond to continue to have access to specialised musculoskeletal rehabilitation services?
Absolutely. Birmingham has a cluster of fantastic hospital and medical care facilities, as well as the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine. I would love to visit, and I hope I can do so in due course.
I think I am right in saying that I am the only Member of the House of Commons, if not Parliament as a whole, to have Mauritian heritage; if I am wrong about that, I am happy to be corrected. Why does the Secretary of State not see that the proposed deal between the United Kingdom and Mauritius is a dangerous one because of the increase in China’s access to the islands near Diego Garcia, an unaffordable one—whether it is £9 billion, £18 billion or £52 billion, that is money that should go to our armed forces—and, above all, a humiliating one in the eyes of the Mauritians, the Americans and the international community? Why will he not scrap it?
Earlier in topical questions, the Veterans Minister said that the strategic defence review would be published in the next couple of months. Can he confirm that it will be published by the end of April?
It is a fair correction. I said “in a couple of months” and then “in the spring”.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
General CommitteesI beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Space Industry (Licence Exemption for Military Activities of Allies) Regulations 2025.
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. The first duty of Government is to keep the country safe. National security is the underpinning of the Government’s plan for change. As the Secretary of State has made clear, the threat to the UK is increasing, with growing instability around the globe and growing Russian aggression. Missile defence is a critical thread in our tapestry of national security.
We test and train regularly with our allies, and our next missile defence testing and training exercise, code-named Exercise Formidable Shield, is in May 2025. Formidable Shield is a US-led exercise and will be hosted by the UK Government at the Ministry of Defence’s Outer Hebrides air weapon range on behalf of NATO and our defence partners. It is one of the most advanced and comprehensive missile defence training exercises in the world. It involves the UK and allied forces conducting live fire drills, missile defence tests and real-world, scenario-based training.
These activities are critical to the defence and security of the UK and the strength of our military alliances. First, they enhance interoperability. Exercise Formidable Shield will bring together 10 nations, each with distinct systems, targets and technologies. It will allow us to align these different systems and work in concert effectively in real-world operations, so the UK and our allies can respond quickly and cohesively to any threats.
Secondly, Formidable Shield improves our collective missile defence capabilities and our ability to adapt to evolving ballistic missile and other threats. With global tensions rising and missile technology advancing, it is essential to refine and improve our strategies continually to protect the nation. This is why the live fire element of Exercise Formidable Shield is particularly valuable.
Thirdly, Exercise Formidable Shield reinforces strategic deterrence, which is vital in maintaining stability and preventing conflicts from escalating. The exercise sends a strong message to our adversaries that the UK and NATO and its allies are prepared to defend ourselves and our territories against any form of aggression.
To replicate operational conditions for these exercises, the UK and allied nations need to operate ever-more sophisticated defensive missile systems capable of climbing above the stratosphere. That would bring them within the scope of the licensing regime in the Space Industry Act 2018 and its associated secondary legislation. The 2018 Act was never intended to regulate military activity. It was passed into law to ensure the safety and appropriate governance of the commercial spaceflight industry, and is regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority.
The Government seek a licensing exemption under the 2018 Act and its associated secondary legislation for allied armed forces activities. This exemption is very narrow. It only allows allied armed forces, their operatives and international military organisations such as NATO to fire sub-orbital—in other words, non-orbiting—uncrewed rockets from MOD sites or platforms with MOD permission and under the control of the MOD’s regulator.
The exemption will bring multinational exercises in line with sovereign ones. Similar stratospheric tests conducted solely by the MOD are not affected by the 2018 Act and its accompanying licensing regime on the basis that, as a matter of statutory interpretation, the Act does not bind the Crown.
Exercises above the stratosphere that are exempt under this instrument will be under the expert supervision of the defence regulator that has monitored military activities for decades, including MOD rocket launches above the stratosphere. Unlike the civilian authorities, the defence regulator has the infrastructure and expertise to oversee the safety of these exercises properly. The regulations will therefore avoid putting increased bureaucracy or a new burden on the civil authorities.
This instrument will apply to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is subject to the affirmative procedure as set out under section 68(6) of the 2018 Act.
The UK’s missile defence capability is a critical component of national and global security, but as with all defence capabilities, to be effective, it must be constantly maintained, updated, exercised and tested. Exercise Formidable Shield, which is planned for May 2025, is the next essential opportunity to conduct live fire drills, missile defence tests and real-world, scenario-based training.
An enormous amount of military planning has gone into the exercise from all nations involved, and the Government seek appropriate regulatory certainty by the end of February to get the maximum value from it. Approving this exemption in a timely manner will send a clear signal that the UK Parliament is united in defence of our national security, united against our adversaries and united in its support for NATO.
I thank the Committee for its thoughtful considerations of these regulations. It is worth covering some of the points made by the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire, and keeping track of the Westcott space cluster in his constituency.
Safety, safety, safety—that is the line to take on this issue. The Military Aviation Authority and the Civil Aviation Authority have long been in discussion about it, and have actually conducted a complete review of how their two systems differ. They have come together to say that it will not bring any increase in risk from a safety perspective. We will continue to work with both organisations to ensure that continues in the medium and longer term.
My overarching view is that these regulations bring to a close the unnecessary burden on our allies for testing and trialling the advanced missile systems that need to be integrated into our wider defence ecosystem as a whole. Allowing this exemption will brings allies on board, so we can have a collective defence of our homeland, airspace and waters. I will come back to the hon. Member on how the future risks have been interpreted and make sure that he is made aware of them.
These regulations are a great thing for defence. They will enable our defences to outpace the malign ambition of our adversaries. I hope that the Committee has found the debate informative and will join me in supporting the regulations as we move forward.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I welcome this debate, and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) for securing it. I also thank him for inviting me to his constituency, where I met his cadet force. The questions I was asked by the cadets were as difficult to answer to those we get from the Opposition. It was inspiring to see such young people, who were full of life of life and energy, holding me to account when I went down to visit. I thought it was absolutely superb.
I say to my hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) that there are a couple of statistics that are really useful at outlining the social benefits of cadets to the UK and the youth of the nation. If the cadet experience helps to change the life outcomes of just 1% of cadets a year, so that they are in employment, education or training, the annual costs of the cadet forces would be covered. That is a fantastic statistic, which shows that this is a spend-to-save model.
In terms of health and wellbeing alone, participation in cadet forces produces an average annual return of between £90 million and £120 million each year. Each year, it is estimated that the lifetime value of vocational qualifications gained by the most disadvantaged cadets is well over £130 million. When we start racking and stacking those costs, the benefits of cadets far outweigh some of the effort and energy to get it moving in the first place. Finally, adult volunteers, who the cadets rely on so heavily, benefit from being in the cadet force and can gain qualifications that can generate a total increase in potential lifetime earnings of around £50 million. When we pool all that together, the impact and benefits of cadets are definitely not lost on me or the Government.
As one of the largest voluntary uniformed youth organisations, with roughly 130,000 people across the country, the cadet forces have two particular compelling benefits. First and most importantly, they transform young people’s sense of purpose and—I agree—boost their life chances. Secondly, cadets play a vital role connecting defence to society, at a time when there is perhaps more distance between the two than there has ever been in the past. That is crucial at a time of rising threats to Britain’s security. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell mentioned, we must really understand what service means.
Let us consider the first of those two points. Independent research has shown that cadets benefit in multiple ways from membership. Not only do they find it engaging, challenging and fun, but taking part in activities and gaining new experiences can be life changing. I recently went to see the Sea Cadets in my constituency with the professor from the university, and we talked through some of the benefits and really got into the weeds. I was encouraged not only by the individuals and children I saw going through that process, but by the amazing instructors. When we combine the two, the magic happens. That is the fundamental principle of the cadets.
Taking part in the activities and gaining new experiences can also be life changing for many. They improve, for example, their mental and physical wellbeing—an area where we know there is an increasing need across society. Cadets develop the self-confidence to achieve things they would otherwise never have attempted, or never had the opportunity to attempt. Perhaps even more valuably, if they do not achieve their objectives immediately, they develop the resilience to keep on going despite that. In the process, they might discover individual talents and attributes that may otherwise remain dormant.
For some, particularly those who may be struggled at school, participating in cadet forces improves their educational chances of success. School attendance and behaviour tend to improve among cadets, and they are far less likely to be excluded from school. Those who come from economically disadvantaged families are among the greatest beneficiaries.
Let us not forget those who step forward as the adult volunteers, as my hon. Friend mentioned. They are dedicated people who are the inspiration behind the cadet forces’ success. The volunteers, too, gain from the experience and learn new skills that can benefit their careers.
As I have said, cadets play a vital role in connecting defence with society. The membership of the cadets is significantly more diverse and geographically spread out than that of our armed forces. Young people become more aware of career options at an early age, and because cadets are more likely to have a wider spread of skills tested, they are better positioned to choose their future direction as they move forward. The cadet experience plays an important part in boosting awareness of the armed forces in both communities and schools, and this often encourages individuals to pursue a career in the military—although I restate that it is definitely not a recruitment tool. It broadens their experience, opportunities and options.
More than one third of service personnel spent time in the cadet forces, interestingly enough, and they are more likely to go on to lead, and to serve longer than other recruits. A large proportion of the regimental sergeant majors in the Army were cadets or came through Harrogate. The cadet forces give young people and adult volunteers a sense of service, a feeling of belonging, and pride in our country and national institutions, which is really important.
The Minister, like all of us here, is a great advocate for the cadet forces. On that basis, will he continue to make sure that they receive the funding that they need to keep the units alive and kicking and up and running?
I thank the right hon. Member for that comment. I am absolutely committed to ensuring that the funding for cadets continues, but also that funding is broadened out and going not just to certain schools, but to state schools and the more disadvantaged across society. Interestingly, I went to a state school and always wanted to join the cadets, but there was no cadet force available for me to join, so we have to spread the opportunity as well as possible. Interestingly, because of covid, and indeed a variety of other reasons, cadet funding went down from 2019 to 2024. It has stabilised now. We are doing a review of the cadets, which will be wrapped into the strategic defence review when it comes out. There will be more to follow in that case.
That is probably a good segue into some of the challenges. Establishing and running a cadet unit, either in the community or in a school setting, is not always easy, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell mentioned. There are issues with funding and human resources. With cadet numbers growing, attracting and retaining enough capable and motivated individuals to deliver the cadet experience is an ongoing challenge. We continue to work to encourage adults to join the cadets. We have recently made it an essential criterion for those companies that wish to achieve the gold standard of the employer recognition scheme that they show support to cadets and cadet force volunteers. Similarly, through the Cadet Vocational College, there is a range of opportunities for adult volunteers to gain nationally accredited vocational qualifications.
I would like to come to some of the questions posed by my hon. Friend. The role of adult volunteers, in addition to the other commitments that they have, piles a lot of pressure on some adult volunteers, but it is offset in some cases by the qualifications and benefits they can get. However, we need to do much more work to attract more people into the system. I was really interested and proud to see many of those volunteers receive MBEs in the last set of honours. All the uniformed adult volunteers are eligible for award of the Cadet Forces Medal after 12 years of service, and I saw many people wearing it with pride when I went to see the Sea Cadets in my constituency.
We are looking at whether there are sufficient numbers of volunteers, and I would like to see a process whereby we make it more attractive to be a volunteer. How can we ease that burden? How can we help them to balance their personal or professional life and their volunteer service? We will work on that in the future—it is coming out in the review. This is an issue that came out really strongly from the Army Cadets, the RAF and the Navy. How do we make it more attractive and how do we get more veterans, for example, to support the cadet services?
We are talking about the funding of cadet forces, and I mentioned broadening it out from private schools to state schools and the more disadvantaged areas and making it slightly more targeted to ensure better social mobility, and, importantly, looking at more innovative ways to support the funding and linkages to local units and support organisations that are close by. My hon. Friend also mentioned the cuts to CCF as a whole. I would reflect on the overall spending, which has stabilised —it has gone down over £11 million since 2019. We are looking at ways to ensure that there are more cadets and more opportunities for those who take part, but that will come out in the strategic defence review in due course. If my hon. Friend is content, I will move on to my closing remarks.
This Government are convinced—and I am convinced by what I have seen when visiting cadets all over the country, with Members from both sides of the House—that the benefits of the cadets are absolutely non-debatable. The benefits—not only for the young people who participate, but for the volunteers and society as a whole —and the statistics show that it is a spend-to-save programme.
The cadet forces represent excellent value for money. The research has found that defence expenditure on them results in a significant return on investment, not only in monetary terms but through the broader societal benefits. Although they are sometimes difficult to gauge, the analysis suggests that those benefits—for society, defence, and the young people and adult volunteers involved—are absolutely unequivocal. Therefore, while maintaining our current ambition to increase the number of cadets in schools, we are also looking to significantly grow the number of community cadets and broaden the programme to support youngsters throughout the UK to enrich their lives by choosing to join the cadets.
In November last year, the Department for Education announced that it would end its £1.1 million grant for the expansion of cadet forces. Will the Ministry of Defence backfill, or make good on, the £1.1 million that the DFE intends to cut?
I thank the hon. Member for that question. I have had multiple discussions with the DFE about how, when the SDR comes out, we can ensure that there are opportunities for cadet forces across all schools, or as many as possible. That is definitely at the forefront of my mind, and it is included in the broader wrap of defence spending that will be pushed out in due course, after the strategic defence review.
To summarise, by providing as many opportunities as possible, we can support youngsters throughout the UK whose lives are enriched by choosing to join the cadets. It is a spend-to-save model, which, at a time of societal and geopolitical uncertainty, helps us to do our part by building community coherence and reconnecting Britain with its armed forces.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
General CommitteesI beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Armed Forces (Court Martial) (Amendment No. 2) Rules 2024.
It is a great honour to be here under your chairmanship today, Mr Efford, so thank you very much. This draft statutory instrument amends the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 by changing the rank requirements for the president of the court martial board, where the defendant is a very senior officer.
Before I set out the changes that the SI will make, it may be useful for me to provide some context regarding the role of the court martial board in the service justice system. The UK’s separate system of military justice dates back to the Bill of Rights 1689. Having a separate service justice system enables the comprehensive system of command and discipline, on which operational effectiveness is based, to be enforced swiftly and efficiently. The service justice system reflects the need to maintain discipline through sentences, which can be imposed by the commanding officer at summary hearings, or in the court martial for more serious offences.
The constitution of the court martial for trial proceedings comprises the judge advocate and a board of lay members. Depending on the offence or offences being tried, the board will consist of three to six lay members. Their role is similar, but not identical, to that of a jury in the Crown court in England and Wales, as they are solely responsible for deciding the guilt or innocence of a defendant at contested trial proceedings, based on the evidence that is presented to them.
The constitution of a court martial board depends on whether the defendant is a service person or a civilian. When some or all the members of the court martial board are service personnel, the president of the board is the senior officer. The role of the president includes that of the foreperson of a jury. They will chair the discussions during deliberations on the verdict and will ensure that all the members have an equal voice and vote.
An overriding principle is that the constitution of the court should be fair, with lay members drawn at random from the widest potential pool. Crucially, that includes a deconfliction process to identify whether any member knows another member, a defendant or a witness, or whether they have served in the same unit as the defendant since the date of the alleged offence.
A recent case highlighted a risk to this overriding principle of fairness: the court administration unit initially encountered difficulties in finding a president and a board to try a case where the defendant was a senior officer, or a major general. As a senior officer, he was well known—he was connected to the system and had gone through the same career courses as many of those who were to be put on the board. His potential character witnesses included serving and retired OF-9s—so all the way to the senior levels of the military—who were also known to the pool of potential board members. It was exceptionally difficult to find and select that board/jury. By the time of the trial, however, the defendant had left the Army, so the use of civilians as members of the board was permitted. Nevertheless, that would not have been possible in law had the defendant still been serving.
Although cases involving defendants who are senior officers is rare in the UK, it is sensible to close this loophole so that the service justice system is ready and able to deal with those cases if and when they occur. The draft statutory instrument addresses this issue by amending rule 34 of the 2009 court martial rules, which sets out the requirements for the president of the board. Currently, rule 34 requires that where the defendant is rank OF-6—that is, a commodore, a brigadier or an air commodore—or above, the president of the board must be of a superior rank to the defendant. That can include the president holding the same rank as the defendant, if the president is more senior to the defendant within that rank.
The SI before us changes this requirement. Where possible, the president of the board will always be the highest appropriate ranking officer available. However, to close the loophole, if it is too difficult to find an officer of a superior rank due to a lack of impartiality, in particular, or availability, this change allows the military to broaden the pool of potential presidents. In the rarest of occasions where the defendant is the rank of OF-6—so, a brigadier—or above, we will prevent a conflict of interest by selecting a suitably qualified but completely disconnected officer with a minimum rank of OF-6. This will allow them to impartially act as the president of the board, chair the discussions during deliberations on the verdict, and ensure that all the members have an equal voice and vote—importantly, with no conflict of interest.
Every effort will still be made to find the most senior ranking and impartial president of the board. While only likely to be used in exceptional circumstances, this amendment ensures that where the defendant in the court martial is a very senior officer, it will always be possible to select a president of the board with the appropriate seniority for the important duties and functions of the role, eliminating the risk of a legal case being overturned.
I believe that our armed forces personnel should all be held to the highest possible standards, whether they are starting out or at the end of their military careers, and no one should be able to time the system out. I believe in the fairness and rigour of our service justice system: no individual, irrespective of rank, should get off on a technicality. A high-functioning service justice system underpins the operational effectiveness of our armed forces.
I will address the point that my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble made first. In my view, the SI addresses a loophole that has allowed—albeit not nefariously—senior officers potentially to time the system out because of our inability to select what we call the military jury. Broadening this out will really speed the process up and will bring people to justice in the fastest, most effective and most efficient way.
Let me address some of the questions from the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford. The previous Minister under the Conservative Government pushed this in 2023. It has taken time, within the bureaucracy of defence, to pull this through. It was raised with me when I sat down with the service justice system and I agreed to it almost immediately, because it made complete sense. We have cross-party agreement on that.
From a sentencing condition perspective, the change is primarily about the make-up of the board. It does not affect sentencing as a whole. That system will stay in place. As for whether this is linked to broader armed forces legislation, that will come out in the armed forces Bill in the next 12 to 24 months, when we will have a far greater opportunity to ensure that the correct legislation is in place to enable us in relation to everything from recruitment and retention all the way through to improvements in the service justice system as a whole.
I am grateful for the contributions from my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble and the Opposition spokesperson. On the rarest of occasions, and where the service justice system is investigating a senior military person, it can prove difficult to find suitably disconnected and impartial senior officers. I believe that the change will ensure that we open the aperture to select and allocate senior officers to deliver service justice in a timely and effective manner, maintaining the integrity and fairness of the service justice system, and in doing so, maintaining the operational effectiveness of our armed forces. I commend this instrument to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThank you, Mr Speaker.
This Government have already taken swift action to demonstrate our commitment to renew this nation’s contract with those who have served. We have awarded £3.7 million in veterans’ housing grants, veterans will be exempt from the local connection test for social housing in England, and veteran cards are now accepted ID for elections. We have launched a £75 million LGBT financial redress scheme; Op Fortitude, Op Courage and Op Restore are all progressing at pace; and we are currently reviewing how we can make veterans’ support more institutionally resilient. This demonstrates that we have a bias for action, and this Government are delivering for defence.
Last year, I had the pleasure of meeting Tim Latter, a Royal Navy veteran and owner of Grindhouse gym in Tatenhill. After facing his own mental health challenges, Tim set up that gym and launched Project I Got Your Six, which is an inspiring fitness coaching programme designed for the military, but also a way for people to talk openly about their mental health. What steps are this Government taking to support veterans with their mental health after their service? Perhaps the Minister would like to meet Tim with me, to see the amazing work he does.
I thank my hon. Friend for a really relevant question. It is essential that we cater for both the physical and psychological impacts of service on those who have served. Op Courage has already had 35,000 referrals. I congratulate Tim Latter on the work he has done, and I would be glad to visit his gym—and perhaps do a little phys with him—to see how it helps veterans’ mental progression in due course.
I welcome the Government’s commitment to a new armed forces covenant. Will the provisions apply to local councils, so that we see Conservative Hillingdon council end its unfair parking charges on military personnel and their families in service accommodation—an issue that was raised with me recently when the Secretary of State visited to announce the welcome investment in military housing—and we can finally say that Hillingdon puts our heroes first?
I thank my hon. Friend for what, again, is a very important question. I ask him to write to me on the specific issue of Hillingdon council and parking. The important underlying fact is that we have to put the covenant into law—we have made that commitment, and it will happen within the next two years. We will deliver it, and hopefully we will eradicate the postcode lottery in support to veterans across the country.
I welcome this Government’s quick action to deliver on our promise to veterans of making veteran ID cards an accepted form of voter ID, which rightly ensures access to elections for those who have served to protect our freedoms. Will the Minister work with colleagues across government to ensure that veterans are made aware of that very important change?
It took us four months from starting the process to getting the veteran ID card recognised as voter ID, which is superb. We will move this matter forward, and I would love to discuss it in more detail. I highlight that it is not only a physical ID card: we now also have a digital card, which is increasing veterans’ ability to register with all the different services available.
Will the Minister join me in congratulating East Riding of Yorkshire council on achieving the armed forces covenant employer recognition scheme gold award, and pay tribute to both the council leader Anne Handley and our armed forces champion Councillor Liam Dealtry for their roles in achieving that? Could he also tell the House what he is doing to encourage more organisations to achieve this highest standard in veterans’ support?
I thank the hon. Member for raising that point, and congratulate the people he has mentioned on signing up to the covenant duty, which is superb. They join about 12,400 others who have given their signatures, which is a fantastic example of British society standing up to support veterans. In due course, I would like to visit and meet them when we get a chance.
In Shipley constituency, there are over 3,000 veterans. I have enjoyed meeting local veterans recently, and I invite my hon. Friend to join me in thanking them for their service. However, with the number of homeless veteran households in England reaching 2,270 in the year 2023-24, will the Minister assure me that veterans in Shipley constituency will receive the housing support they need?
I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the veterans of Shipley. It is essential, especially over the Christmas period and the next three or four months, that anyone who needs a roof over their head has one. That is why Op Fortitude is really moving at pace: we have had just under 3,000 referrals, and over 800 veterans have been put into housing. I would say that if anyone has any veterans in their constituency, please get them to go on to gov.uk and look at the services available. There are plenty of services out there to get those individuals into housing as fast as possible.
It is welcome in Falkirk that this Government are determined to renew this nation’s contract with those who have served and their families. Can the Minister assure veterans in Falkirk that this Government’s work to strengthen the reach and practical application of the armed forces covenant will be a major focus for his Department in 2025?
Absolutely. As a fellow Scot, I take that very seriously, and I will be visiting there at the end of this week. I have already met the Scottish Veterans Minister, and I want to champion best practice and mutual understanding between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to ensure that we can all learn off each other and deliver the most and best services for veterans in due course.
As a former councillor, I know that many veterans can find themselves at a disadvantage when trying to access services, including social housing. Veterans face housing challenges not only in Bathgate and Linlithgow, but across the country. With many Scottish councils and indeed the Scottish Government having declared a housing emergency, will the Minister advise the House what engagement he has had with the Scottish Government to ensure that the housing needs of veterans are prioritised?
My hon. Friend highlights a pretty important point. The Government as a whole are pushing forward to deliver houses at a faster rate over the next five years than, I hope, ever before. Veterans will be included in that, and when I come to Scotland at the end of the week these are exactly the issues I will be talking to the Scottish Veterans Minister about.
Operation Prosper was launched in April 2024 to support veterans into work after they leave the armed forces. Does the Minister expect to continue the funding for Operation Prosper after the conclusion of the spending review?
As we move forward, we will be involved in the SDR and looking at supporting veterans into transition and employment in due course. A large proportion of veterans who leave services go into employment. We want to continue that and increase the percentage over time.
Service Dogs UK is a charity dedicated to supporting armed forces and emergency services veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder. Since opening its south-west hub in Somerton in 2020, it has matched rescue dogs with veterans across Somerset and the wider south-west, giving veterans an opportunity to manage their PTSD and move on with their lives. Will the Minister join me in congratulating the charity, and will the Government support such charities to expand their crucial work?
The charity has my full congratulations on the work it is doing. Having pets such as a dog provides psychological comfort and friends, especially for people healing from some of the psychological impacts of service or indeed combat, and I fully support it. If the hon. Member would like to discuss at a later date how we could push that forward, she should please reach out to me.
Just before Christmas, we had the welcome announcement of a new veterans commissioner in Northern Ireland, Mr David Johnstone. Although I am sure the Minister will join me in wishing him well in his new post, it is a part-time post, it has only two seconded staff and it is not on a statutory basis like elsewhere. Will the Government put that post on a statutory basis so that the many veterans in Northern Ireland can have the service they deserve?
I thank the hon. and learned Member for his important question. First, we must get the armed forces covenant into law, which should cover a large proportion of the veteran support mechanism. I congratulate David Johnstone on taking up his post; I phoned him just before the Christmas recess. I am excited and looking forward to working with him and ensuring that the unique attributes of veterans in Northern Ireland are accounted for and represented in the correct manner.
Maggie Haynes is the founder of Tuppenny Barn, a horticultural therapy charity in my constituency, and she is a veteran herself. She established a female veterans course after observing that the challenges faced by women leaving the armed forces combined with poor communication from the MOD was leaving them unaware of the services available to them. What is the Minister doing to improve support for female veterans?
We are working on our armed forces strategy, part of which will be a specific section for female veterans. We understand the nuances and difficulties of female veterans leaving service and trying to find employment or linking employment with family life and so forth, so we are pushing that forward really hard. Again, I would be very pleased to discuss that with the hon. Member in due course.
I thank the veterans Minister for his answer. In previous questions in this Chamber I have suggested to the Minister that he might wish to visit Beyond the Battlefield, a charity in my constituency that gives the only care for soldiers whenever they have fallen on bad times. Will the Minister make time available to come and see what we do with that charity in Portavogie and Strangford as an example for everyone else?
Later this week I am going to Scotland, and we will do Wales and then Northern Ireland in due course, and when I visit I would be honoured to come to see the good work the charity is doing.
I thank my hon. Friends for raising an exceptionally important matter. The deal to sell off most of our service family accommodation in 1996, then rent it back and upgrade it, is probably one of the worst deals I can think of. The recent Annington homes deal, supported by those on both sides of the House, was delivered at speed by this Government, and it saves this country and the taxpayer £600,000 a day, or £230 million a year. It puts us back in the driving seat of owning all our family accommodation. It allows us to renovate or rebuild as required over the next five to 10 years and long into the future. In the medium to long term, we have a once-in-a-generation, lifetime opportunity to rebuild all our accommodation.
May I wish a happy new year to you, Mr Speaker, to Members and to constituents in North Somerset?
Morale in our military hit record lows under the last Government, and I am proud that this Government have already delivered the largest pay rise for the forces in more than 20 years. Does the Minister agree that this housing deal is the next practical step in the action that this Government are delivering to improve service lives for dedicated personnel?
My hon. Friend makes an important point. I have lived in some of the accommodation and I have seen how bad it is, and this deal will allow us to change that. Over time we will have a chance, saving £230 million a year, to give the people who serve this country the deal they deserve when it comes to housing.
During my service in the late ’80s, through the ’90s and into the early 2000s, I had the pleasure of having to live in military accommodation. Its poor condition was discussed almost weekly. Roll forward 20 years, and we are still having the same discussion. Can Ministers please assure me that they will now seriously get a grip of that and, through the strategic defence review, give some clear programme delivery dates for when we will deliver for our forces?
Absolutely. As part of the SDR, we will set out our new defence housing strategy. We will look at how we take Annington, build on it and improve the housing available for those who serve in our armed forces.
As a member of a forces family, I welcome the Government’s landmark decision to renationalise service housing. For too long, military families have been living in substandard accommodation. How will the Minister ensure that this investment leads to tangible improvements? In what timescales can our servicemen and servicewomen expect to see those improvements start?
We are buying back, we are breaking it down and we will build back up. That will be part of a comprehensive plan across the country and across 36,000 homes over time. It will look to deliver housing that is fit for those who serve and the family members who are often left behind when those individuals deploy. I have absolute confidence that we will deliver that, in conjunction with independent bodies as well as those in defence.
The Minister has already referred to his successful £6 billion deal to repurchase the MOD housing estate from Annington. It will give members of our armed forces the opportunity to have their homes refurbished, which they have longed for, for a very long time. Has he managed to persuade the Treasury that he will need to provide further funds to pump-prime these improvements? If so, how will he strengthen the hitherto very poor management of our military housing estate?
As part of our new defence housing strategy, we will look at how we will manage that estate as a whole and whether we will do it completely differently. As part of the SDR, we will look at how we will pump-prime some of that to get building back across the whole defence estate, bearing in mind that there are 36,000 houses and some of them have been in situ for about 50 years and will need to be knocked down and rebuilt.
Under the previous arrangement between the Ministry of Defence and Annington, £100 million was released for accommodation upgrades in the first seven years of that arrangement. What due diligence was carried out ahead of the sale? What additional investment will be made in the married quarters that the Government have brought back into the MOD’s ownership?
This is one of the best deals that defence has done in a long time. It has bought back 36,000 homes, saving the taxpayer £600,000 a day or £230 million over a year. We are in discussions with the Treasury now about where that money goes and how it will be used in the future, but I assure the hon. Member that the rebuild plan will be within the defence housing strategy as part of the SDR.
Since October 2023, more than 5,000 Afghans eligible for support via the Afghan relocations and assistance policy have been moved into Ministry of Defence service families accommodation—both transitional and then settled service families accommodation—under Operation Lazurite. How many SFA houses in the defence estate are currently being used to house Afghan families? What is the plan for their onward movement once their three-year eligibility for settled service families accommodation has elapsed?
I thank the hon. Member for that really important question. We have a duty of care to those from Afghanistan who are now living in the UK and we are absolutely committed to delivering on that. I will write to him in due course on the specifics of his question.
In 2023, there were over 5,000 reports of damp and mould in service accommodation. Members of the armed forces are willing to put their lives on the line to support the freedoms that we take for granted, so it is inconceivable that they and their families are forced to live in homes filled with damp and mould. Now that the MOD has agreed to buy back thousands of these family homes, will the Government commit to ensuring that all service family accommodation meets the minimum standards for social housing as set out in the decent homes standard?
We already do that. The reality is that a large proportion of these houses were built 50 to 60 years ago, so the thick insulation and double-skinned walls that we would see as commonplace just do not exist. The Annington deal is therefore such a good one, as it allows us to refurbish or rebuild as required.
The Prime Minister has made it clear that ensuring that veterans and their families can access support—including for housing—is a priority; he mentioned that in his speech at party conference. He has also announced that veterans will be exempt from the local connection test for social housing in England, and committed an additional £3.5 million to continuing the reducing veteran homelessness programme, including Op Fortitude.
The transition from military to civilian life is a critical moment for many veterans, but too often, those with complex mental health issues fall through the cracks, especially when it comes to accessing housing. The armed forces covenant is an excellent positive step forward, but its voluntary nature means that not all veterans will benefit equally. Will the Minister commit to reviewing the transition process, and particularly mental health services provision, to ensure that all veterans receive more comprehensive and tailored support?
The career transition pathway that has just been set up is a great example of how we are helping those leaving the services to transition into civilian life. Op Courage, in particular, has had more than 35,000 referrals; it is for anybody with mental health issues caused by their service. I recommend going on to gov.uk and looking at the services available, as they are pretty ample.
The defence sector provides well paid jobs across my city and constituency, and across the country. With 10,000 adults in the constituency on the minimum wage, will the Minister help me to work with the Department for Education to ensure that kids in my city get opportunities to work in this brilliant sector?
I thank my hon. Friend for a very important question. I would like to talk further about this. We have been working with the Department for Education—
Is the Minister happy to answer the question? I do not quite see how it links to the subject, but if he is happy—
We owe a debt to our nuclear test veterans, who delivered their service in a courageous and honourable way. I have already committed to looking into the records issue in detail, and to continuous engagement with all the charities and nuclear test veteran groups.
I absolutely agree. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to change housing for our service families. It will save taxpayers £600,000 a day, and £230 million over the year. It gives us an opportunity to build back over the medium to longer term, and to deliver the deal that those families deserve.
The essential role played by women throughout both major wars in delivering an industrial powerhouse to support our armed forces is not lost on the Government. I am happy to take this matter offline and discuss it in due course.
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. The defence housing strategy will be a medium to long-term strategy and will be published, in line with the SDR, in the spring.
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Given the Secretary of State for Defence’s previous remarks, can he set out for the House exactly what discussions there have been between Ministers and the incoming Trump Administration on the future of the Diego Garcia base?
The Veterans Minister and I recently visited Bournemouth War Memorial Homes, a specialist social housing provider for veterans in my constituency. Will the Minister outline what the Government are doing to support housing providers to buy or build homes for heroes across our country?
I thank my hon. Friend for the visit to Bournemouth to see that exemplar of how to house veterans. The Prime Minister has just announced £3.7 million of funding towards veterans’ housing and there will be more to come in due course.
There were reports over the weekend of NATO worries that the UK is not contributing enough to the European defensive shield. That leaves us vulnerable to a missile attack. I hear what the Minister has said about the strategic defence review, but what assurance can he provide that he will look at our defence spending commitments with sufficient speed to provide good enough defence for our country?
Will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss the figures for the incidence of blood cancers and sarcomas in veterans and current service personnel who have crewed particular military helicopters?
Given the concerns around exposure to exhaust fumes and the importance that we place on safety, the MOD is this month initiating the testing of the exhaust emissions of in-service helicopters to ensure that we are meeting our duty of care for personnel. Nevertheless, I would also like to meet my hon. Friend to discuss the issue further.
Following the Christmas day attack on Finnish sea cables, what assessment has the Defence Secretary made of the threat to British interconnectors? Which individual Minister is ultimately responsible for their security?
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsLed by Major General (Retired) Simon Lalor, the reserve forces and cadets associations external scrutiny team provides an independent assessment on the health of the reserve forces on behalf of the Department. I have today placed in the Library of the House a copy of the 2024 report, along with a copy of my response to this report. I am most grateful to the team for their work.
Attachments can be viewed online at:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2024-12-17/HCWS326/
[HCWS326]
(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberWhat a debate we have had today. We have heard some exceptionally harrowing and, indeed, inconceivable stories of events that have taken place in our lifetime. On that note, and on behalf of the Ministry of Defence, I wish to apologise to all those affected by the ban. The way in which the MOD mistreated LGBT personnel between 1967 and 2000 is a flaming injustice that has burned for more than five decades. It is an injustice that was acknowledged by Lord Etherton’s excellent report last year, and, as I said during our debate six weeks ago, it is an injustice that put the MOD on the wrong side of history. It is an injustice that the last Government worked to heal, with the support of Members in all parts of the House, and for that we thank them. When the scheme opens tomorrow at 09:00 hours and we finally begin the important process of offering financial recognition of the pain caused, we will turn a page and start a new chapter in defence history.
This Government have taken the decision to increase the amount that can be disbursed by the scheme by 50% more than the plans that we inherited. Not only will those dismissed or discharged from service receive a payment; those who were impacted more broadly by the ban will do so too. However, it is important to acknowledge at the outset that no amount of money can undo the hurt and pain caused, and no process can genuinely quantify the impact on earnings. This is a financial acknowledgment of wrongdoing and regret by the state, and while I know that it will not fully satisfy all, I hope that it will help to bring affirmation, and some closure, to those affected. The scheme will also address two more of Lord Etherton’s 49 recommendations—including rank restoration and rewriting those records—leaving just seven to be completed, which remains a major priority. I thank all Members on both sides of the House for their comments and the harrowing stories that they related, and I will now try to address some of their specific questions.
Let me say first to my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven (Chris Ward) that we are working exceptionally hard with Fighting With Pride and 10 other charities to ensure that we advertise this scheme as broadly as possible across the community. Indeed, this debate itself is one way to get that message out. We have 24 months of the recognition scheme, primarily because of the prerogative powers but also following the recommendations of Lord Etherton’s report. We have allocated £90,000 to help charities to assist the veterans with their applications, because we acknowledge that some of the processes may not be as simple as others. We are also asking for a reverse burden of proof on the access of the £25 million financial total. Predicting the number of cases that will come forward will be exceptionally difficult: experiences will differ, time served will differ, and therefore the amount of recognition will differ as well.
As we heard from the hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway (John Cooper), facing the Treasury is perhaps much safer than facing the enemy. Nevertheless, I thank those in the Treasury, and the broader team in the Ministry of Defence, for working so hard—championed by the Secretary of State for Defence—to deliver the extra £25 million, a 58% increase on what we had previously. Speed of delivery is essential, and we have gone for both speed and breadth: the speed to deliver the scheme as fast as feasibly possible, and the breadth to ensure that compensation is delivered to all those affected by the ban, both dismissed and discharged. Those who may have been impacted by the ban, but not necessarily recorded—this was mentioned by the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman)—will also be able to apply for these resources.
We appreciate the comments of the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), as well as his work prior to our coming into government. I hope that LGBT veterans now feel, more than ever before, part of the veterans family, thanks primarily to the restorative measures in Lord Etherton’s report, which have gone so far to delivering that. We have now implemented 42 of those 49 recommendations, and I think we will close them out by 2027. Responsibility for some of them does not sit with the Government, but we are working hard with the Office for Veterans’ Affairs and other Government Departments to close them out as quickly as possible.
I will cover two of the points raised by the hon. Member for Aberdeen North and my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven now, but will address others later. Overseas applicants can apply; the scheme is open to everyone. We will have a look at the geographical spread of charitable support. Although we do not have a huge amount of control over it, we will ensure that it is balanced and will work with the Office for Veterans’ Affairs to deliver it.
My hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker) mentioned the important subject of HIV. I can confirm that we are on the case. Although there is no blanket ban on HIV-positive personnel flying in the armed forces, the Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that our policies that impact on people with HIV are regularly reviewed. I and the Minister for the Armed Forces in particular are closely considering HIV policies relating to aircrew, and we will get back to my hon. Friend in due course.
My hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Oliver Ryan), and the hon. Members for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire), for Aberdeen North and for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry) mentioned a concern about the cap. The financial recognition scheme is a response to a gross injustice—we acknowledge that. It was designed to be a tangible acknowledgment of wrongdoing and regret, and was never intended to compensate for loss of earnings, but I accept that there will always be people who feel, for good reason, that we have not gone far enough.
A North Cornwall constituent of mine was attending the debate from the Public Gallery but has had to leave because of the outrage that he feels. Does the Minister agree that greater financial compensation should be given to veterans such as my constituent, who suffered such enormous harm, including gang rape and severe physical assault that resulted in lifetime disabilities?
I thank the hon. Member for that question. We have tried to balance demands for individual circumstances to be fully recognised on a case-by-case basis with the demand for speedy resolution. We have arrived at amounts that reflect the practice of relevant employment tribunals, and payments made for harm and suffering in the service complaints process, which also align with similarly sized payments awarded by the scheme in Canada. Although Government schemes of this type will always cause debate—I acknowledge that— we have done our best to be fair and balanced, using figures based on relevant precedents and a process that will reflect individual circumstances within a framework designed to avoid delay and ensure fairness across that cohort. It is probably worthwhile to dig into that in a little more detail to provide the House with answers.
The LGBT dismissed or discharged payment for veterans who were dismissed or discharged based solely on their sexual orientation or gender identity under the ban will be a flat rate of £50,000. The LGBT impact payment is open to all those who experienced any pain and suffering directly related to the ban, including bullying and harassment, invasive investigation and, of course, imprisonment. Those who were dismissed and discharged can also apply for that payment. The LGBT impact payments will be assessed by an independent panel against three tariffs—£1,000 to £5,000, £5,000 to £10,000 and £10,000 to £20,000—up to a maximum of £20,000, to ensure that awards are proportionate to the level of impact.
We heard several questions, particularly from my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley), about why the measures have taken so long. Today has been more than 50 years in the making. I totally agree that veterans have waited far too long for this recognition of historical injustice. However, since coming into government, we have moved exceptionally fast. This Government have a bias for action. We came into Government in July, listened to Fighting With Pride and the LGBT veterans, informed and updated the House and colleagues last month, and designed a broad and rapid payments scheme, and at 0900 tomorrow, that scheme will open and deliver.
We also had some questions about the impact of loss of earnings, particularly to do with pensions. It is worth noting that this is not a compensation scheme and has not been designed as such. With such a variety of experiences and personal circumstances within the affected community, and with limited evidence available, it is difficult to estimate how long each veteran would have served if not for the ban and what rank they might have reached.
Finally, on the question about Lord Etherton’s recommendations: two are for the Ministry of Defence to implement and five are for the national health service to address. My team is in touch with the Department of Health and Social Care as we move that forward.
As various Members mentioned, it is worth noting the broader non-financial restorative measures that are taking place. There are 719 applications already, which is fantastic. In practice, this means everything from apology letters sent directly to individuals from the chiefs of the Army, the Royal Navy and the Air Force, through to medals and berets, ensuring that these veterans feel included as part of the veterans community.
When I joined the Royal Marines in 1999, this abhorrent ban on homosexuality in the armed forces was still in place. Today, a quarter of a century later, we turn a page on that shameful chapter in our national story. The financial recognition scheme is an acknowledgment by the state that it was wrong. While I accept that many veterans will continue to feel that it does not go far enough, the scheme is another vindication of the harm and pain they have suffered, and vindication for all those who stood against the ban.
I urge everyone affected by these past failings to access the financial recognition scheme and other restorative measures by visiting the LGBT veterans support page on the gov.uk website. On this page, they will find a simple guide explaining how to apply for financial recognition payments, which includes details of the scheme, eligibility and the supporting documents required. There are simple screenshots of what to expect when applying, and the application form has been streamlined to make the process straightforward and user-friendly to ensure that veterans can apply with as much ease as possible.
I thank Lord Etherton for his outstanding work on this report. I also thank the LGBT community and the charities that supported it, particularly Fighting With Pride, for their courage and continued efforts to bring this to a resolution. They have engaged comprehensively throughout the programme, with both the MOD team and me.
I have an old saying from combat: “Courage is a decision, not a reaction.” Few have been so courageous as those watching this debate today. To stand up, to struggle to your feet when everyone is trying to push you down, and to shout when everyone is trying to silence you—that is an active decision, and perhaps the most courageous decision of all. They should stand proud from here on out.
The debate today and the speed at which we have worked—the fact that from tomorrow at 0900 the scheme will open—is a credit to all those who have worked on the team. It also reaffirms that this Government are a Government of action. Indeed, we have a bias for action, and the Defence Secretary and I will continue to drive this forward until every recommendation of Lord Etherton’s review is implemented to right the wrongs of the past.
To the individuals affected—Victoria, Craig, Danny, Claire, Andrew and Janice, to name but a few—we apologise. We hope that this will go some way through the healing process. In line with Claire Ashton and my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury, we want to ensure that every veteran who has helped to keep Britain secure receives the respect and support they deserve.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Lord Etherton’s independent review into the treatment of LGBT veterans.
(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsThis Government acknowledge the historic policy prohibiting homosexuality in the armed forces was regrettable, wrong and completely unacceptable. Following the publication of Lord Etherton’s review into the experience of LGBT veterans between 1967 and 2000, the intent behind all 49 recommendations were accepted by the previous Government and now backed by this Government. In the coming days, 42 of these 49 recommendations will have been delivered and the commitment remains to implement the remaining recommendations.
Recommendations 28 and 29 of Lord Etherton’s review referred to a financial award, an important tangible recognition to those affected under the ban between 1967 and 2000 and a way to show this Government’s commitment to accountability and rectification of systemic inequalities. That is why I am pleased today to announce that the LGBT financial recognition scheme will launch on 13 December, one year after the recommendation was formally accepted by the previous Government, with a budget of £75 million, 50% higher than the cap recommended in the Etherton report. The scheme intends to provide recognition to those impacted by the ban, and to express Defence’s regret of the policy it upheld between 1967 and 2000, not to compensate for loss of earnings.
The financial recognition scheme will include two types of payments, the first for those who were dismissed or discharged and the second for those who were impacted in other ways. This will acknowledge the suffering caused by the historic policy with payment levels being proportionate to the experiences of individuals.
The “LGBT dismissed or discharged payment” will be available to veterans who were dismissed or administratively discharged, including officers who were instructed to resign, based solely on their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity under the ban. Eligible applicants for this payment will receive a flat rate of £50,000 and may be eligible to apply for a further LGBT impact payment.
The “LGBT impact payment” will be available to those who experienced pain and suffering which was directly related to the ban, including harassment, invasive investigations and imprisonment. There will be 3 tariff levels with payments varying from £1,000 to £20,000 and this payment will be decided by an independent panel, separate from and independent of the Ministry of Defence.
The scheme will remain open for two years and all payments will be exempt from income tax and will not affect any means-tested benefits that an applicant receives. The Government recognise that some veterans impacted by the ban are seriously unwell, and the applications of terminally ill veterans will be prioritised.
Whilst the financial recognition scheme cannot undo the damage of the historic policy, it represents a meaningful effort to honour those impacted and provide a sense of closure.
In addition to the financial recognition scheme, I would like to also announce today, the implementation of two further restorative measures. Firstly, veterans who were administratively discharged during the ban, based solely on their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, will now be able to apply to have this discharge qualified to set right their records, removing any blame or dishonour from those who served. Secondly, veterans who were reduced in rank as part of their dismissal or discharge can apply to have their rank restored, intending to recognise the achievements made during their service.
Finally, whilst not within the scope of Lord Etherton’s review which looked into experiences under the ban between 1967-2000, when HM armed forces policy differed from criminal law, this Government acknowledge that LGBT veterans serving before 1967 may have had similar experiences. That is why today, I would like to extend four non-financial restorative measures to this cohort. These veterans can now apply to have administrative discharges qualified, reduced rank restored and certificates of service re-issued, and former officers may apply to have their service details published in the Gazette, as part of the official record.
[HCWS306]