(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing this important debate to this place today. It is really important that we shine a light on this issue. I have the greatest respect for the sustained and passionate advocacy in support of a posthumous Victoria Cross for Lieutenant Colonel Robert Blair Mayne. I would also like to fully associate myself with the powerful tribute the hon. Member has paid, as have many in the House today, to Lieutenant Colonel Mayne, who was without doubt one of the greatest heroes of the second world war. His legacy lives on in the spirit of the Special Air Service today, and his courage and accomplishments were rightly celebrated for our generation by the portrayal—slightly dramatised, perhaps—in the recent BBC drama “SAS: Rogue Heroes”.
It is particularly pertinent that Lieutenant Colonel Mayne was recognised for his bravery at the time. He is one of the very few recipients of the rare third bar to the Distinguished Service Order—I only have one; he had three—in recognition of his actions as commander of the 1st SAS Regiment during Operation Howard in April 1945. It should be remembered that this made him one of the Army’s most highly decorated officers of that time. While it is possible to give gallantry awards posthumously, it is a key tenet of the British honours and awards system that they are not granted retrospectively. This ensures that awards are timely and clearly linked to specific actions or activities, and in particular that they are awarded within the context of the time.
As I have mentioned many times, specifically when talking about Northern Ireland and various inquests and inquiries, it is the responsibility of those investigations to understand the context of Northern Ireland at the height of the troubles. It is also up to us, sitting in this warm place on these wonderful Benches, to understand the context in which the senior generals made those decisions around gallantry medals. For gallantry awards, as well as for civilian and military honours, the guiding principle is that they will not be considered more than five years after the incident in question.
It is worth recalling that all significant battles and operations that took place in the second world war were discussed in great detail in the context of medal recognition at the end of the war. It is worth noting that, out of all the years of war, it was only in 1945 that more Victoria Crosses were awarded posthumously than to those living. After years of war, many had seen conflict, courage and commitment to service, and while it is not necessarily fact, the bar—no pun intended—for VCs was statistically higher at the end of the war. It is worth noting that it was recommended in June 1946 that no further recommendations for gallantry awards should be considered after 1950.
From what we know, from the paperwork that exists about Lieutenant Colonel Mayne’s recommendation for a Victoria Cross, there is lots of speculation that appropriate processes were not followed or that an administrative error took place. The evidence we have suggests that Lieutenant Colonel Mayne’s citation passed through the correct chain of command and was properly considered by a succession of senior officers, all of whom had a lot of combat experience in leadership and in the field, and were experienced in the consideration of medallic recognition and gallantry awards after many years of hard fighting during the second world war.
I thought it might be worthwhile bringing forward some of that correspondence. Certain correspondence—held by the Canadian National Archives—from the Deputy Military Secretary to his counterpart in the first Canadian Army reveals some doubt about the VC in the discussion between members of the VC committee. It states that the VC committee considered it not quite clearly up to VC standard, and that it was not a single-handed act of heroism—that goes to the point about “single” or “signal”. In the letter, the Deputy Military Secretary also suggests the award of the third bar to the DSO. It cannot be known for certain whether that is the reason why the VC was amended to DSO in third bar form, but it is likely.
It is clear that, at some point in the process, it was considered more appropriate for Lieutenant Colonel Mayne to be awarded a third bar to his DSO, which is itself an exceptionally high honour. That decision was signed off by Field Marshal Montgomery, who had considerable combat experience throughout the whole of the conflict. We also know that it was not uncommon at the time for the recommended level of award to be changed as the citation went through the consideration process.
Today, the process remains relatively similar. I sat on many such honours and awards committees in my time in the military. Such committees, at unit, brigade and division levels, will rank awards against the context from their own particular perspectives. A unit may have 20 to deal with, a brigade 60 and a division 100. We do not necessarily know the totality of the picture at the time Lieutenant Colonel Paddy Mayne’s citation was considered at each level. There may have been stiff competition across the military, particularly in the Army.
I fully respect all those who disagree with the decision made in relation to Lieutenant Colonel Paddy Mayne. However, I believe it credible to conclude that he was a war hero of the highest order while also concluding that, in some cases, it is not appropriate for officers, officials or Ministers working today, some 80 years later, to overrule the decisions made by senior officers at the time, who were steeped in wartime experience and had a contemporary appreciation of the brave actions of Lieutenant Colonel Mayne and, importantly, his peers.
Fantastic points have been made in this important debate. Winston Churchill casts a shadow over those who perhaps did not get a medal. For everybody who did get one, there are probably 100, if not 1,000, who did not get one but definitely deserved to. Interestingly, the Australian precedent was mentioned twice, including by the hon. Member for Strangford. However, Australia’s separate honours system does not have any impact on UK policy. Australia not only bestowed one VC retrospectively for Vietnam, but, as was rightly mentioned, a second retrospective VC to Ordinary Seaman Edward Sheean, who was killed in 1942. That speaks to the VC having no boundaries across services or domains.
The remarks about the Falkland Islands were news to me. I am sure that Paddy Mayne enjoyed the isolation and camaraderie of a small team wandering around those pretty barren but amazing places. The Bomber Command medal highlights how divisive the medals and honours system can be. I am sure that those with military service can remember multiple conversations about who got awards and who did not.
As we talk about honouring those who served in the second world war, it is worth noting that many world war two veterans were up on the main screens of Piccadilly Circus today for thousands to see, honouring their service during that war.
Combat can bring the best and worst out of us. As I have said several times in the House, courage is a decision, not a reaction. It was clear to me that Lieutenant Colonel Mayne made multiple decisions that were deeply courageous rather than just reactions or habit—indeed, they probably became habit because he made them so often.
To conclude, I am extremely grateful to the hon. Member for Strangford for the opportunity he has given us all today to mark and lionise the incredible bravery, leadership and spirit demonstrated by Lieutenant Colonel Mayne some 80 years ago. Robert Blair Mayne was simply one of the greatest from our greatest generation —a man of audacity, ingenuity and fearsome courageousness, whose raids behind enemy lines and courage in rescuing injured comrades under fire is the stuff of military legend; a man whose spirit lives on in the “Who dares wins” motto of the SAS. The proud history of the SAS marks it out as one of the most battle-hardened and professional organisations of its time, and the very tip of the spear. Paddy Mayne is not only a hero within his regiment but a national hero, and he reminds me of the saying, “In times of peace, we must protect the mavericks.”
It is recognised that clerical mistakes in judgments or orders, or errors arising from any accidental slip or omission in language, can explicitly be fixed—and there is no time limit for doing so—as long as the intent of the original decision holds. As a Member of Parliament who has a mention in dispatches, a Military Cross and a DSO, I will take note of the new evidence that has been highlighted, its context, and the exceptional circumstances of this debate, and I will ask the honours and awards committee to review the evidence and find a decision. Once the decision is found by that independent body, it will be finalised. That will provide an answer, once and for all, on how Paddy Mayne’s service is recognised.
There was lots of mention today of looking at the evidence with fresh eyes in the context, and having a cool, calculated review of the historical facts. The honours and awards committee will do that, and we will present that evidence in the House. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford for our debate. Lieutenant Colonel Robert Blair Mayne is a man whose spirit and legend will remain recognised in the annals of the mother of Parliaments in perpetuity.
(8 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and congratulations on taking up such an important role. We look forward to working with you. Thank you very much for allowing me to vacate the Front Bench and come to the Back Benches to make my maiden speech; I really do appreciate it. I also thank my hon. Friends the Members for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) and for Gravesham (Dr Sullivan) for their fantastic maiden speeches. I will try to live up to them and get the third one done okay, but they were really well done, with a fantastic story to tell.
Before I delve into my speech, I thought it would be worthwhile stepping back and taking a look at the position globally. First, I do not know any country in the world that has high education standards and a weak economy, and I would argue, as we sit here in this debate, that better education and having more opportunities relate directly to the economy, and that the two are mutually supporting. Secondly, I would like to say, as Veterans and People Minister in the Ministry of Defence, that the Army is one of the biggest providers of apprenticeships in the UK; there are 13,000 to 14,000 across the whole service—and that is just in the Army, not necessarily across the MOD. I and other ex-military individuals here are testament to the fact that the military provides people with a fantastic opportunity to realise their ambitions.
It is a true privilege to stand before you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and an honour to be in this historic place. I am deeply grateful to the constituents of Selly Oak for placing their trust and confidence in me. I will work tirelessly to deliver change for the people of Selly Oak, and indeed this great nation.
It would be remiss of me to stand here without thanking the man who held the seat before me, Steve McCabe. Steve was a devoted public servant and an esteemed MP, a role he held for over 27 impactful years. To name but a few of his achievements, he worked to improve the NHS and social care, and championed small businesses in our constituency. His legacy in these great halls and in Birmingham Selly Oak will be enduring. I am also personally grateful for his guidance, and indeed his friendship throughout the campaign, which, as I took to knocking on doors, felt very alien to me. I used to joke with him that if he did not know it, it generally was not worth knowing. On the doorstep, people would often chastise me by commenting that it was one in, one out. Indeed, the Scots are slowly taking over.
I would like to outline my heartfelt sympathy for the Army officer involved in the shocking incident outside Brompton barracks in Kent yesterday evening and his family. Our thoughts, collectively, are with them all.
Importantly, I would like to extend my gratitude to the extraordinary and unflagging volunteers in my constituency from all walks of life. Their drive and dedication helped me, and helped our election victory become achievable. The generous spirit with which they committed huge amounts of their personal time genuinely humbled me. I have never seen so many people give up their time to support the cause. It is one of the many reasons why I am really proud to stand here representing Selly Oak constituents, and to drive forward change for them.
I have the privilege of being the MP for Birmingham Selly Oak, which is a constituency rich in working-class heritage. Its historical developments are interwoven with Birmingham’s industrial story, but it also blazed its own unique trail in, I would argue, industrial and social relations. The Cadbury family, for example, was not just any family, and theirs was not just any business. That business saw the value in investing in the local workforce by building hundreds of homes, social spaces and schools, not only securing a legacy, but making Selly Oak a far better place to live when times were exceptionally tough. Imagine if big business mirrored even a small fraction of that same spirit, or indeed that self-generated leadership, in today’s society.
When walking around knocking on doors and speaking to constituents, I often described Selly Oak as a United Kingdom squeezed into a constituency. We have different cultures, different characters and hundreds of small businesses. We had the Cadbury factory, and we have the Cadbury attraction, which has over 500,000 visitors every year. We have the great Birmingham University, which is so fantastic. We have many NHS workers and teachers, and an abundance of entrepreneurs, micro-breweries and charities. Much to my dismay, when I found out that I was to be a junior Minister, I learned that I could not attend the all-party parliamentary beer group. I can only apologise.
Selly Oak is still developing. I apologise to the rest of the west midlands MPs, but it was no wonder to me that a reputable newspaper named Stirchley, a small part of my constituency, one of the best places to live in the west midlands. We have one of the most stable and diverse populations in the UK, and as I am sure the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is acutely aware, we have the second biggest medical university in the UK, leading hospitals in our backyard, and an upcoming life science facility that makes Selly Oak and Birmingham a centre of gravity for the mission to transform and invest in the NHS, and for championing and harnessing the spirit of this immensely innovative nation.
Selly Oak not only has wonderful leafy suburbs, but is home to one of the biggest council estates in Europe. I look forward to working with the Deputy Prime Minister on the homes and communities agenda to ensure that the regeneration of Druids Heath is in keeping with the indomitable spirit of those who live there. I also want to do everything in my power to deliver on the Chancellor’s mission for growth, so that we reduce the requirement for food banks, increase police numbers, support our NHS more effectively, and release the pressure on our education system. There is much to do, but I have complete confidence that Labour Members will be able to do it.
The work of the small army of volunteers—people who stepped in to care for each other when past Governments forgot them—has my deep admiration. They keep so much afloat—no Navy pun intended—supporting Acorns children’s hospice, which is one of the biggest in Europe; Oaks and other primary schools, which are the backbone of opportunity throughout our constituency; the Shed in Cotteridge Park; and many social gardens and food banks across the constituency. Their energy, commitment and selflessness is truly remarkable.
What was most noticeable on the campaign was the Brummie culture, and I was amazed and humbled by the willingness to engage, discuss and debate throughout. The constituents of Selly Oak wanted to talk and have a voice. They have the energy, hope and ingenuity to build a better life, and it is our job to help them get there. Selly Oak and countless other places across the nation deserve our respect, our support, and our steady leadership in enacting meaningful and lasting change.
This general election result saw democracy in full swing, which I am deeply proud of, but as many in the House will have witnessed, there is a rise in threatening, malicious and intimidatory behaviour in our politics. Just as the constituents who put us here deserve respect, I commend those on all sides of the House who have put themselves in this place, in difficult circumstances, ready to volunteer, stand up and serve. I salute you all.
In that spirit of service, it was an honour and a great privilege to accept the Prime Minister’s offer of the role of Minister for Veterans and People, and to take up the mantle of working not only for the people of Selly Oak as their MP, but for veterans and families who have sacrificed so much for our nation, and who have stood and fought, often in the face of the unimaginable. I will stand with them, as one of them, to deliver the highest duty of care, commensurate with the risk and rigour that we expect from those who have defended, and continue to defend, the nation on the frontline. Achieving that will deepen the effectiveness of our service overall. It was therefore a huge thrill to announce yesterday in Birmingham, in my capacity as Minister, and to share here today that the 2027 Invictus games, which provide opportunity to those who have been wounded in service in any way, shape or form, will be hosted in the great city of Birmingham. What better way to demonstrate the unconquerable soul and unity of our veterans, their families and those serving, and of Birmingham and indeed Great Britain?
I would like to step back and give the House a reflection from my experience over the last 24 years that may be relevant to the rest of the year. After spending the past 24 years in the far corners of this world, fighting to uphold and protect our democratic values, Members cannot imagine—I genuinely mean this—how humbling it is to participate in this democracy, to go out on the campaign trail, to knock on doors, to vote, and to see the democratic process at work, and now to stand here among this fantastic cohort. I see this election victory not only as a moment for me, or from the perspective of Selly Oak or of all of us; I think it is a moment for all democracies. Our deeds must be as strong as our words. The world has become tougher and far more unstable, with insecurity surrounding us.
As His Majesty alluded to in his speech last week, we live in an increasingly fractious world; one where autocratic regimes seek to erode the universal freedoms that our parents and grandparents fought to protect. I have been on some of those frontlines and seen that at first hand. I can tell the House that there is little doubt in my mind that the tapestry of the international order is fraying, and in some cases now threadbare. The rise of populism and extremism and the assault on values such as the rule of law, self-determination and democracy itself should be of the greatest concern to us all.
I welcome and support the call for a ceasefire in Palestine, and we watch with a wary eye the developments in the Asia-Pacific. Most important though, from my perspective, is acknowledging and countering Russia’s despicable and illegal invasion of Ukraine. Russia has not only brought war to Europe, but even questions whether Ukraine has the right to exist and govern itself.
It is worth considering that if four years ago I had stood here on either side of the House and explained that today in Ukraine there would have been 900 Russian casualties by this time, and that by the time hon. Members had had lunch there would have been 500, and perhaps a similar number of Ukrainian casualties, Members would have probably told me that I was a scaremonger, a dramatist or, at worst, a belligerent Scot, but here we are. We have a war on the edge of Europe of a scale and of such devastation that is inconceivable to us. Indeed, it is taking place at such a pace that it is changing the very character of warfare. That is why I welcome the defence review, because the only thing consistent about change is that change is consistent. We must adapt and keep pace with the shifting character of conflict. If not, we risk falling short of our mission and indeed our duty and our responsibility to serve.
In my career, I have never stood idly by and done nothing in dangerous or uncertain times. The United Kingdom has not, either; we lead the way. After fighting for democracy all over the globe for so long, it is a great privilege to be stood here in this great Chamber and carry that fight forward not only on behalf of Selly Oak, defence and our veterans, but on behalf of all the people in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
I would like to call the Front-Benchers at 20 minutes to 7. That gives us time to get in John Slinger for his maiden speech.