UK-France Nuclear Partnership

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Thursday 10th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Maria Eagle]

The hon. Gentleman complains about the amount of time it has taken this Government to do things in respect of defence, but we had to pick up the mess that was left by his Government, who were in office for 14 years. It is a bit of a cheek for him to complain about delay, when the reality is that his own Government did nothing for 14 years. I have made it quite clear that our defence nuclear posture is not changing, and that we are not seeking to acquire new and different nuclear weapons, but if the vital interests of the UK and France are engaged and threatened, we will co-ordinate our nuclear response as a result of this agreement, and that provides a greater deterrent.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

A much stronger relationship between the UK and France in this area will require a deepening of our commercial collaborations in our respective industrial bases, particularly in the supply chain. Will the Minister comment on how the Government’s own procurement policies will help to support this collaboration, particularly as it might benefit companies in the Teesside defence and innovation cluster?

[Maria Eagle]

My hon. Friend is correct. The refresh of the Lancaster House treaties is about not just nuclear co-operation, but co-operation between our conventional forces and greater co-operation and effort between our industries bilaterally to provide us with things like complex weapons in a way that will deter and enable us to defend ourselves at thresholds well below any nuclear threshold. Any increase in defence spending, as we are seeing, does give more opportunities for our own industries. Whether those companies are offering novel or dual-use technology, or are our traditional big primes, any increase offers more opportunity for all of them to help us in our rearmament.

LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Wednesday 9th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Veterans and People (Al Carns)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Pritchard. I thank the hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) for securing this important debate and for her wider efforts to ensure that LGBT veterans are properly and promptly compensated for past injuries, injustices and wrongdoings.

I also thank Fighting With Pride. I came into this job nigh on a year ago, and I often say that courage is not a reaction but a decision. The ability of its members to shout when being pushed down and told to be quiet has really raised this issue over the past couple of decades and brought it to where we are today.

I am also grateful to right hon. and hon. Members who have fought valiantly on this issue, not just while I have been in post but previously. Importantly, I thank the late Lord Etherton. It is unfortunate that he is not here today; nevertheless, the foundations of the programme lie with him and he should be deeply honoured.

The hon. Member for Chichester has helped to shine a spotlight on a truly dark era in military history. When I joined the military in 1999, the ban was still in place, LGBT personnel suffered horrific mistreatment and abuse, and homophobic bullying and sexual violence were absolutely widespread. That injustice has cast a long shadow over the lives of so many. Many dedicated professionals had their ambition in life cut short by those rules and regulations. My view that it is an injustice was powerfully reflected in the late Lord Etherton’s independent review in 2023. It is an injustice that placed the Ministry of Defence on the wrong side of history. It is an injustice that the Government are determined, and have done so much, to address.

Lord Etherton’s review, with all its recommendations, was submitted to the Government in May 2023 and published in the summer of that year, so there was a year between then and our coming into government. In the time that we have been in government, we have delivered a lot, although there is more to do. After much deliberation, we launched the financial recognition scheme. Up and down, left and right—not in our Government, perhaps—individuals were concerned that the payments were not enough or would not be processed in the right manner, but this Government raised the budget to £75 million.

The scheme will be open for one year, but I want to be absolutely clear, as I have been with the previous and current heads of Fighting With Pride, and assure all LGBT veterans that, if they are eligible and apply, they will receive their payment. Even if that extends, we will live by that commitment. Importantly, if the payments exceed £75 million, those who are eligible and apply will still receive their FRS payment. We will absolutely live by that. I have taken huge pride in how fast we have got here, and we will deliver.

I met Fighting With Pride this week and heard veterans’ concerns. We are looking in detail at the financial recognition scheme, and I will say more on that after I have given a progress update. As of 30 June, the Government have completed 42 out of 49 recommendations of Lord Etherton’s review. I saw one of those recommendations the other day: the memorial that will be built, which is looking fantastic. Five more recommendations are pending ministerial approval. Some of those do not sit within our Department, but we are almost there. We will complete those as fast as we can.

I am pleased to update hon. Members on the progress of the financial recognition scheme, which acknowledges the harm inflicted by the ban and offers tangible recognition to those who were affected. The Government have been unequivocal and I have been committed to ensuring that we right the wrongs of the past. The Prime Minister, the Defence Secretary and the chiefs of services have all expressed their deep regret for the unacceptable treatment of LGBT personnel. The scheme that launched in December 2024 is a tangible demonstration of that commitment. As I said, we have raised the budget to £75 million. I hope that brings affirmation and some measure of closure to those who have waited far too long for consecutive UK Governments to address the damage of those times.

On slow payments, I must address the important issue that the hon. Member for Chichester rightly raised: the timely delivery of payment to veterans who have served the country with courage and distinction. The rate at which those deserved payments are being processed is an issue that is causing considerable concern to constituents.

I take note of the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven (Chris Ward) about an individual who may be terminally ill or elderly. I want to be clear that part of the reason the process has been quite slow is because we have focused on the terminally ill, the elderly and the most complex cases first. I made a commitment to Fighting With Pride that we would do that to ensure that no one misses out on payments due to illness or age. That has contributed, although it is not the sole reason, to the speed and delivery of payments, but I will stick by it because it has to be a No. 1 priority. We are almost through what we think are most of those claims.

I assure hon. Members that we are taking decisive action to deliver payments more swiftly and efficiently. I will mention a couple of things that we are doing. We are boosting resources and allocating extra staff and funding to ensure that claims are processed more quickly, so veterans receive the support they deserve. A key reason for delay has been problems with the automated payment system. We acknowledge that and are looking into it. We are trying to process claims as quickly as possible. The system will get faster the more claims that we process, so we think it will speed up. That will streamline the process and reduce the administrative bottleneck, which is significant.

Let us remember that a lot of the files and data are not held digitally, so it is not a case of a Google search. There are Yellow Pages-sized files sitting in hangars all over the UK, so it takes time. We are also increasing the frequency of sittings of the independent panel to two a week, hoping that the automatic system will catch up, to reduce waiting times. Although there is still work to be done, I am confident that those combined measures will speed up the system. In addition to the commitments that I made earlier, the LGBT community should be assured that no one will miss out.

The issue about front-loading some of the military records when the non-financial redress scheme kicked in was that no one had agreed to or committed to the financial redress scheme, so we did not know what was required in the first place. That was not this Government but previous Governments. We did not front-load that; a lot of the non-financial redress schemes were already completed or under way.

On the 18 weeks for information, I will get back to the hon. Member for Chichester with the statistics on how we process that. We will have an electronic copy of that, so I will be sure to write to her with the detail. On the civil servants, the only thing I would say, and I say it relatively gently, is that those civil servants with the expertise to focus on the payments are the same civil servants who are writing ministerial correspondence back to people. The more ministerial correspondence that we get, the more time they are spending on that, rather than on processing claims. I will say this: after the Ministry of Defence broke the trust of LGBT communities, please now have the trust that we will deliver on this guarantee for you.

I will provide a bit of transparency on the details of the scheme and answer some of the questions put by hon. Members. As of 7 July, we have received many applications for the scheme. Of those, 944 were submitted online and 162 were received as hard-copy applications. To break that down a bit further, there were 242 applications for the dismissed or discharged payment only; 250 applications for the impact payment only; and 614 applications for both payments.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

The Minister may recall that in an earlier armed forces debate, I raised the case of Kate Green, a Royal Military Police veteran who felt compelled to leave the service just before the ban was lifted. Will he join me in highlighting the fact that the impact scheme makes provision for people who felt compelled to leave and that they, too, can apply for compensation?

[Al Carns]

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct and I champion what he says. For anyone out there who has not made an application, please get in touch and process it as fast as possible.

I will give a couple more statistics for the record. The first payments were made just 15 weeks after the scheme’s official launch and I am pleased to report that we have now paid over £4.2 million in total in the redress scheme. There were payments to 84 applicants for the dismissed or discharged payment, with each applicant receiving over £50,000. Additionally, we have made £82,000 in impact payments to 11 applicants, ranging from £1,000 to £2,000. I see the scheme speeding up considerably in the not-so-distant future.

It is worth noting that all payments are exempt from income tax, which was one of the key issues for Fighting With Pride when we moved forward with the scheme. Furthermore, payments will not affect any means-tested benefits, such as universal credit, income support or housing benefit, which is also critical.

Now, I have a message for anyone listening to this debate, or for anyone pushing out details about it on social media. I urge all those affected by the ban while serving between 1967 and 2000 to read the guidance, and to please apply for financial recognition via the “Veterans of the LGBT Ban: Financial Recognition Scheme” page on gov.uk. They have my word and a commitment that if this process extends for longer than a year, we will keep going and we will ensure that individuals who put in a claim get it resolved as quickly as possible.

I will also say that the scheme is not necessarily just about financial recognition. It is also about acknowledging the sacrifices and indeed the injustices faced by LGBT veterans, and ensuring that their experiences are recognised and indeed valued.

Armed Forces Day

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I thank the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), for sharing with us those powerful words by Kipling, which have sunk into our national consciousness. I appreciate the cordial nature of the debate between the Minister for the Armed Forces and the shadow Minister. We three were together earlier this week for a debate on recruitment in the north-east, which was also incredibly cordial. This is a great opportunity to continue that conversation.

In Stockton, we celebrated Armed Forces Day early, on Saturday, with a flag-raising ceremony, many celebrations on the high street, and a service led by Rev. Paul. I was pleased to see representatives of our local armed forces. Members of the Yorkshire Regiment, which largely serves my constituency, were there, although people in the north of my constituency might tend to join The Rifles, and we had representatives from our local cadet forces, including the Royal Marines Cadets, the Sea Cadets and the Royal Air Force Air Cadets, who are based in Norton, in my constituency. There were also representatives from the Royal Military Police Reserves, who I am proud to say are also based in Norton. Stockton has strong representation from the armed forces in our local community; I am pleased to say that one in 20 people in my constituency are either serving in the armed forces or veterans.

I mentioned the Royal Military Police. I wondered if they were not mentioned enough in the House, so I thought this would be a good opportunity to commend their work. They can claim to be the longest-established regiment or corps, with a history stretching all the way back to the 13th century and the appointment of the first sergeant of the peace. Today, they are a vital part of our armed forces, with around 2,200 soldiers and civilian staff. They support operations in conflict zones, peace- keeping missions and humanitarian efforts. This is perhaps a suitable moment to pay tribute to the hon. and gallant Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for her service as a captain in the Royal Military Police, and for her continued advocacy for the armed forces community.

The Royal Military Police are much like other skilled units in the armed forces, but they have three main roles: the policing of the Army, special investigations and close protection. In policing the Army, they will be attached to a unit in the field, and will ensure that captured members of enemy forces are treated appropriately, legally and humanely, which is clearly an important role. They were recently deployed in Ukraine as close protection for staff of the Foreign Office. There are airborne RMP, based in Colchester; they were part of Operation Market Garden at Pegasus Bridge.

[David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)]

I welcome what the hon. Gentleman is saying. Would he accept that the actions of the Royal Military Police attached to fighting units are a direct reflection of the Army and of our national character in upholding the rule of law even in warfare?

[Chris McDonald]

I would. I may go on to develop this point, but that role creates for members of the Royal Military Police a unique duty and a serious responsibility that puts them in a slightly different position from their comrades, which must be quite difficult. That is why I wanted to highlight the role of the RMP.

Members of the RMP can also find themselves in incredibly dangerous situations. A friend of mine, who is a member of the RMP reserves, highlighted to me the role of Royal Military Police officers during the second world war and in other conflicts in managing traffic points. Those fixed grid reference points are vital in managing the traffic flow of equipment and personnel appropriately for our logistics, but they also mean that RMP personnel are easy to target by artillery and aircraft. They carry out that role with great bravery; I commend them for that.

As I have mentioned, policing puts individuals in a difficult and unique position. That is also true for the civilian police force, but I think there is a particular additional burden on members of the Royal Military Police in how they discharge their duty. I was struck by the story of Royal Military Police veteran Kate Green, which she told 20 years after the lifting of the LGBT military ban. When she served in the Royal Military Police, the thing that she feared most was being asked to investigate those suspected of hiding their sexuality from the Army. If an LGBT serviceperson admitted their sexuality, they were out and that was the end of their military career. Eventually, Kate decided that she could not continue with her service anymore and that she did not want to continue to live a lie herself, so she handed in her one-year notice. The LGBT ban was lifted on 12 January 2000, just a short time after her career ended. Kate now works with the Royal British Legion and maintains a strong connection with the Army, despite no longer serving. This is an opportunity for us all to welcome the lifting of the LGBT ban and to recognise the service of LGBT veterans.

[Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

Nearly 30 years ago, when I was at the University of Exeter, I argued vociferously to make sure that our armed forces were allowed to recruit from our campus and that they got people like us into the military, so that we could create a military that was receptive and reflective of our society, so that people from LGBTQ+ communities could serve alongside us, without any impediment. Does my hon. Friend agree that inclusion comes from being part of an institution and helps to change it from within, and that it is necessary that we do not put in place impediments to armed forces recruitment on campuses today?

[Chris McDonald]

I thank my hon. and gallant Friend for his service and his continued advocacy in this place for the armed forces. He spoke powerfully, and I agree with him. It is no small task to change the culture in an organisation; it starts and ends with leadership, so we must thank the leaders in our armed forces, who have done exactly as he said.

I will share the story of Rachel Webster. She is a Royal Military Police veteran from the north-east, and she is another example of how it is possible to break down barriers and overcome some really quite entrenched stereotypes. Rachel chose engineering over cookery when she was at school—that was her interest—but she was told that she would not be able to weld because she was a girl. I do not know if any hon. Members have ever had a go at welding, but I have; I am a boy, and I am terrible at it.

Rachel was unable to pursue welding at school, but, like me, she left school and joined British Steel. It was better at teaching her welding than it was at teaching me, because she took a four-year apprenticeship programme and learned how to weld. But her ambition was to enter the armed forces; she wished to join the Royal Engineers, where many of her compatriots on the British Steel apprentice scheme went, but when she applied she was told that women could not be in the Royal Engineers at that time.

Undeterred, Rachel joined the Royal Military Police in 1989. She trained with the Women’s Royal Army Corps, and then with the RMP, and she was deployed to Germany. Her career took her across the world, from Northern Ireland during the troubles to Afghanistan in 2001, but one of her proudest moments came in Iraq in 2003. She was helping to build a girls’ school and impressed the local men, who did not realise it was possible for women to weld—so she was able to use her welding skills on behalf of the Army.

Both Rachel and Kate have really powerful stories. They show us that courage does not know any gender or sexuality, and I hope that their stories will inspire my constituents in Stockton, Billingham and Norton and people across the country. Let me take this moment to very much thank all our armed forces—particularly the Royal Military Police and its reservists in my constituency, across the north-east and across the country—for their valuable service to our nation.

[Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Luke Pollard]

I will return to the right hon. Gentleman’s speech, so he will not have to wait long for my response, but first I will deal with some other points.

I am grateful for the speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) about the national Armed Forces Day event, which I am pleased to see back. She has a passion for the event and is serious about her community. She also has pride in and a close connection to the folk she mentioned—it was a very powerful speech. I am certain that the ice cream will be on the Secretary of State, especially now that he knows he is going to the event, so she should expect plenty of dairy coming her way.

I thank the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter), who spoke about RAF Lossiemouth, the importance of how we base our people and valuing the wider community. I am grateful to him for mentioning HMS Spey; the offshore patrol vessel is doing a superb job in the Indo-Pacific, as is her sister ship HMS Tamar. Their contributions to upholding the international rules-based order and supporting our allies in the region are really important. She is a little ship with a big impact and is really very powerful there, so I am grateful for his comments.

I encourage the hon. Gentleman not to forget the opportunity to talk about resilience spending. He talked about the spending of other Government Departments and councils effectively enabling homeland defence. That is precisely why the spending pledge agreed at the NATO summit was that by 2035, 1.5% of GDP should be spent on homeland defence and other activities that bolster our resilience as a nation. I think he has a strong case to argue on that. NATO will shortly publish the full criteria, setting out what money will come into that, but I believe that the examples he gave are good ones to use in arguing his case, so I encourage him to do that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) and I did indeed wave off HMS Prince of Wales when she left for her deployment to the Indo-Pacific. That was a good opportunity to meet members of her community in Portsmouth. The carrier and the carrier strike group include people from all parts of our country, who are all sailing together, alongside many of our allies, including our Norwegian friends, who have a frigate sailing on the entire deployment. When we celebrate the contribution of our armed forces, let us remember the contribution of our allies to keeping us safe today and in the past.

I am very grateful for the intervention from the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), who spoke about Jack Dark’s 102nd birthday. I am also grateful for the remarks from the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome), who spoke about Norman Ashford, a D-day veteran. It is really important that we value and take extra care of those final few folks from the second world war. We must ensure that we capture their stories and retell them, so that they are not forgotten. I am grateful for the contributions of all of them.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) correctly raised the issue of the RAF photographic reconnaissance aircraft. I can report that the Minister for Veterans has indeed met those involved in the campaign, as I suspect nearly every single person in the House has. If there were a public affairs award for best lobbying campaign, this campaign would certainly deserve it. I understand that progress is being made, and that the campaign group met Westminster city council to discuss the issue. The cost of what is being suggested would need to be met by public subscription, and I have no doubt that it would be, so I expect positive progress. There is strong support for recognition of the bravery of the people who undertook these roles in the second world war, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue. I am also grateful to him for giving examples of service personnel who, in recollections of wartime stories, do not always get the attention that they deserve, including those from the Sikh community, who he spoke about.

It is good to have three Front-Bench speakers from Devon; that does not always happen in this place. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour), who spoke about the contribution that her family made. On the issue of the time of flight, as it is referred to in the Ministry of Defence, that is the time from signing up to attending a training establishment. We inherited a situation in which that time was over a year for some of our services, and that is not acceptable. In July last year, we were losing 84% of people in the process, not because of medical problems or eligibility issues around nationality or criminal records, but simply because the process took too long. That is not acceptable.

I am strongly against the criticism made that our younger generation do not want to serve our nation, because that is not true. Last year, 165,000 people tried to join the British Army, and we hired 9,500 at the end. We lost the vast majority because the process is too long and slow. That is why we are reducing the time of flight. I am very happy to look into the casework matter that the hon. Lady raised if she writes to me. The “10 and 30” policy that I mentioned in my opening remarks should certainly make a difference when rolled out fully across all three services. I will certainly try to discourage the Minister for Veterans and People from reading the transcript of this debate; being regarded as a legend will no doubt boost his humbleness.

I am also grateful to the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East for his concluding remarks, and for his story of nearly crash-landing in someone’s picnic. He did not tell the end of that story, but as he is here in one piece, let us assume that it all went well. I am also grateful for the way in which he summarised the debate.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle) raised valid questions from 216 Battery about training levels. We have inherited a situation in which training—for both regular and reserve forces—was often the first casualty of trying to manage in-year budget pressures over a number of years. We are very aware of that within the Ministry of Defence. We are conscious that the increase in defence spend could, in part, make a difference to that, but as we have a number of challenges to deal with, we need to look at the best way of delivering increased training—particularly adventurous training, which is what many of our forces want. I would be very happy to have a further conversation with my hon. Friend, so that she can raise with me the particulars of those issues.

The hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty), between making his speech and coming back, has changed his tie to look more like mine—I am very grateful for that fashion change. His remarks, particularly about the contribution of the US air force bases in his constituency, were a good reminder of the close friendship we have. I was at the US embassy earlier today as part of a conference organised by the Council on Geostrategy, looking at our transatlantic alliance. Our military-to-military co-operation underscores the value of our relationship with our US friends, and I know that America really does value the bases in the UK that it is able to operate from.

I entirely agree with the hon. Member for Huntingdon that our armed forces personnel should be paid properly, housed properly, posted sympathetically and granted stability. That is the intent of many of the changes we are making. On the stability point, I am thinking in particular about where we are with British Army deployments, because Air Force and Navy personnel generally have greater stability than their compatriots in the Army. We are aware of that issue and are looking at it, but I am certain that the hon. Member will be sending me lots of parliamentary questions—possibly before I have even sat down.

Let me turn to the very serious issue raised by the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis), who spoke about Northern Ireland veterans. He will know—because we have spoken about it a number of times, and he has also spoken with the Secretary of State and the Minister for Veterans—that we on the Government Benches feel very strongly that we need to support our veterans. We are seeking to navigate through that process at the moment. The debate on the petition mentioned by a number of Members will take place on 14 July. I welcome that debate, which will be an opportunity to make the case for those people who served our nation in support of peace in Northern Ireland.

There is more work to be done in this area. After the right hon. Gentleman made his speech, I read the article in the Daily Mail about the launch of the campaign that he referenced. It is certainly true that the Government seek to repeal the current Northern Ireland legacy Act, but what one has to get to the penultimate paragraph of the article to read is that we intend to replace it as well. The right hon. Gentleman chose his wording carefully about how that replacement needs to work.

The current Act is unlawful—it has been found to be so in a number of courts—and it has not prevented some of the things we are seeing at the moment, so we have to find a way forward in this area. The Northern Ireland Office is looking at it at the moment, and we in the Ministry of Defence continue to have conversations with our NIO colleagues—indeed, I think that was the point that the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford, was making in his intervention —and we will continue to do so.

[Chris McDonald]

Coming, as I do, from a constituency in the north-east, let me say that members of our community, of course, served in Northern Ireland for many years, so the issue of Northern Ireland veterans is just as important to those of us on the Government Benches as it is across the whole House. I was in the House on 21 May when the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland said that the Government came into office committed to remedying the failure of the legacy Act. That gave great assurance to me, and I am sure it gave great assurance to veterans in my constituency. Does the Minister agree with the Secretary of State’s comments?

[Luke Pollard]

I entirely agree—there is something that is not right, and it needs to be resolved. I do not doubt the passion that Opposition Members, and indeed those on the Government Benches, feel about this issue. I share that passion. We need to find a solution to this issue that can provide peace of mind as well as the ability to address community concerns. There is a path through, but we need to go carefully to make sure that we are cognisant of all the strong views, but I am certain that will happen. I am also certain that we will continue our conversations outside the Chamber as we work with Northern Ireland Office colleagues, who have the lead in this policy space. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington for raising the issue in this debate.

This has been a good debate for Armed Forces Day. Support comes not just from the Members who can speak in this debate; I am conscious that a number of Members present have been unable to speak, due to the vagaries of parliamentary procedure, including my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell, Wishaw and Carluke (Pamela Nash), who sits behind me as the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State. She is attending Armed Forces Day events at the Motherwell United Services club on Saturday. My hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough and Rushden (Gen Kitchen) was the Whip on the Government Benches earlier, and I am conscious that there are Whips on both sides of the House who might not be able to contribute verbally, but who I am certain will be supporting Armed Forces Day events in their constituencies across the country.

We need to ensure that the warm words and well-crafted speeches we have heard today are put into action all year round. It is not enough to have a day where we celebrate our armed forces; we need to recognise their service each and every day. As the nation sees an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world on their TV screens and on their phones, it is the men and women of our armed forces who are at the pointy end of the defence of our nation, but we can all do something to increase the resilience of our defence.

If everyone in the House updated the operating systems on their computers and phones, Britain would be more cyber-secure than it was beforehand. We all can do something. In this place in particular, Members of Parliament from all parts of the House can continue to make the case for our people, for defence families, for investment, for better pay and for better equipment for our forces. That is this Government’s intent, and from the sentiments I have heard from all parts of the House today, we can see that has cross-party support. I thank all hon. and right hon. Members for their contributions, and I wish everyone a successful Armed Forces Day on Saturday.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered Armed Forces Day.

Armed Forces Recruitment: North-east England

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Wednesday 25th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland), not only on securing the debate but on his doughty championing of the armed forces in our region and around the UK.

Armed forces recruitment in the north-east is of regional and national importance, and matters very deeply to my constituents in Stockton, Billingham and Norton. Our armed forces community is a great source of pride, as hon. Members will have seen if they were with me on Stockton High Street on Saturday, when we had a flag-raising ceremony for Armed Forces Week. There were representatives of our local regiment, the Royal Yorkshire Regiment; the Royal Military Police, which has a base in Norton in my constituency; and our cadets—the sea cadets and RAF cadets based in my constituency, and Royal Marine cadets too.

Those brave members of the regulars and reserves deserve more than my words and the words of hon. Members in this Chamber; they deserve real action. As my hon. Friend pointed out, the reality is starkly different from some of those words. The British Army is now at its smallest size in 200 years. With due respect to the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), who I know is personally a strong supporter of the armed forces, the last decade did not cover his party or the previous Government in glory on this issue.

The armed forces have been hollowed out. They have been underfunded, overstretched and undervalued. As we have heard, over the last decade the number of recruits in the north-east has fallen by a third. This in an area that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) said, is proud of its commitment to the armed forces, and where people know that joining the armed forces provides a route of opportunity that is sadly lacking elsewhere in our economy.

[Lola McEvoy]

What does my hon. Friend think are the causes of the drop in recruitment in our area? I frequently speak to veterans and the aftercare for people coming out of the forces has been really poor. Does he agree that the Labour Government have an opportunity to show not only that we are proud of people when they are serving, but that when they leave, they need to be looked after properly?

[Chris McDonald]

My hon. Friend is right that aftercare is very important. On why recruitment levels have fallen, I would expand on the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor made about the recruitment process and criteria, such as the medical requirements.

When Admiral Sir Tony Radakin spoke to the Public Accounts Committee in April, he clearly said that there is no shortage of people wanting to serve—as we know in the north-east—but too few of those applications are turned into recruits. The rigidity of medical standards is certainly an issue: 76,000 applications were rejected on medical grounds in the last five years, and the MOD’s website makes it clear that even a minor or historical health issue that does not affect daily life could disqualify someone.

Sir Tony is far more qualified than I am to speak about this, but he made a very compelling point that we are assessing people for 22 years of service when most will serve only 10. In fact, if we could take a more flexible approach and think about a five-year service interval, that would open the door to thousands more capable recruits willing to serve.

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

I thank the hon. Member for his kind personal remarks. He is absolutely right, and I will be saying more about this point in my speech, but would he acknowledge that whatever colour of party is in government, all armed forces across the western world are now struggling to recruit and, particularly, to retain personnel? The problem is not unique to the United Kingdom, or indeed north-east England.

[Chris McDonald]

The right hon. Member has a point. Many countries struggle with recruitment, and perhaps the cuts to the armed forces and the delivery of the so-called peace dividend have been an issue in some countries. In the north-east in particular, however, which is the subject of this debate, there is no shortage of committed people desperately wishing to serve. Ultimately, it is the systems in place that are preventing them from doing that.

We are clearly in an increasingly hostile world. We have war in Europe, an increasing threat from China, and, of course, what is happening in the middle east. People are seeing that on their TV screens each evening and they are wanting to serve. We should make it easier for them to do that. If the right hon. Member wants a more direct answer, I think that the outsourcing of recruitment, which was fundamentally a cost-cutting measure as part of austerity, has weakened not just our public services, but our national security.

When my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence took office, he inherited a system that had missed its recruitment targets every single year for over a decade—we had more people leaving the forces than joining. That is why I welcome his commitment to modernisation. We need to cut red tape, to scrap these outdated entry requirements, and to make it fundamentally easier for people to serve.

The strategic defence review recognises the scale of the workforce crisis with plans to invest in infrastructure and people. That includes the award of a 4.5% above inflation pay rise for personnel, which is the beginning of proper recognition of the professionalism and sacrifices of our armed forces, and the commitment of £1.5 billion for armed forces housing. I am sure that many hon. Members have been appalled by the current housing conditions. As my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy) mentioned, if we want to retain talent, we need to think more long term about how people are treated when they leave, and how their families are treated while they serve.

Every day, our armed forces keep Britain safe at home and abroad. They deserve more than gratitude; they deserve a system that works for them. Service personnel in Stockton, Billingham, and Norton know that they are fully supported by our local community, and I am sure they also know that they are now fully supported by this Labour Government.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan.

It is a privilege to participate in this debate in Armed Forces Week, given Sunderland’s proud tradition of military service and as a member of a serving armed forces family. My good friend Dr Dan Jackson, in his excellent book “The Northumbrians” on the history of the north-east, outlines in some depth the martial tradition of our region. His central thesis is that for a significant part of our history we were a border region and that over the centuries the north-east, through a range of different conflicts and wars, has contributed significantly to our nation’s defence.

Men from Sunderland were traditionally recruited to the Durham Light Infantry, which I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) will speak about. Of course, Bernard Montgomery, having served alongside the DLI throughout the second world war, said:

“There may be some regiments as good, but I know of none better.”

[Chris McDonald]

My hon. Friend is giving an excellent overview of regiments in the north-east. He mentions “The Northumbrians”, so will he join me in welcoming to the Public Gallery Ammar Mirza CBE, an honorary colonel of the 101st (Northumbrian) Regiment Royal Artillery? Does he agree with me that he is doing an excellent job by attending this debate, demonstrating the commitment in the north-east to our regiments not just from politicians, but from our honorary colonel?

[Lewis Atkinson]

I will absolutely do that. I commend the gentleman in the Public Gallery and all those who serve. The tradition of connection between place and service is so important and an asset that we must continue to use as we consider recruitment in the future.

One in 20 of my constituents are veterans, probably one of the highest percentages in the UK. Sunderland as a whole—not just my constituency, but the local authority area—has 11,000 veterans. That is partly due to that proud military tradition, but also because, particularly in the ’80s during the period of deindustrialisation when the pits and the shipyards closed, young people lacked work opportunities and, naturally, they joined the forces. There are veterans alive today in my constituency who made incredibly significant contributions in the Falklands, Iraq, Afghanistan and other conflicts. As other Members have mentioned, the forces offered apprentice-style careers that gave people great life chances, apprenticeships and opportunities to travel around the world. They opened up opportunities and horizons for working-class men and women in the north-east.

Our cadet units play a key part in that tradition. I will not repeat the points that my hon. Friends have made, but I want to pay tribute to the units in my constituency. For example, the excellent Southmoor academy, a local community school, has a combined cadet unit embedded in it, enriching the curriculum for those who participate and those who do not. It provides a pathway to options for further recruitment. There are also Territorial units and facilities in my constituency, in particular the Territorial Army centre in Seaburn, which is a base for the Rifles and a medical regiment.

I will, however, refer mainly to issues regarding our regular forces. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland) on securing the debate and opening it, and, as he said, there has been a recruitment crisis in the wider country and particularly in the north-east of England. The most recent statistic available for Sunderland Central is that around 10 people per year have joined each of the services. If we contrast that with the 11,000 veterans across Sunderland as a whole, we can see the drop-off.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for the Armed Forces (Luke Pollard)]

It is very good to see you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. You and I being in the same room will probably alert the Whips—they will be keeping an eye on us both very shortly. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland) for introducing this debate, putting this on the record and being a proud champion of the north-east and of the men and women from the north-east who serve with such distinction in our armed forces. He has done his constituency and his region enormous credit with the way that he introduced the debate. I will turn to some of the points he raised in just a moment.

Let me say how warmed I am by the contributions to this debate from all parts of the House in Armed Forces Week. It is so important at this time that we take a moment to thank the people who serve, celebrate their service and highlight that a career in the armed forces not only provides the opportunity to keep our country and our allies safe, but provides someone with a lifetime of skills that, as we know, are in demand in the private sector and will give them pride in what they do. One of the members of the armed forces that my hon. Friend spoke to said that the armed forces had trained, trusted and invested in him. That is exactly what we seek to do for all the members of our armed forces.

I must declare an interest as the son of a Royal Navy submariner, albeit one based in Devonport in Plymouth rather than in the north-east. I am confident that, wherever we are in our proud United Kingdom, we can all feel a sense of pride in the service of the people in uniform and, importantly, the families that stand behind them. The people of the north-east have a long and proud tradition of doing just that—a tradition captured by the permanent exhibition at Newcastle’s Discovery museum, reflected in the annual military parade in Sunderland, which is traditionally the largest outside of London, and honoured earlier this month by 100 soldiers from the 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards, who departed King’s Cross in their scarlet tunics and bearskin caps to make the symbolic pilgrimage to Berwick-upon-Tweed, where they were formed 375 years ago and where they were received today with great pride.

Service personnel from the north-east have been and continue to be central to the history of our armed forces. They are central to the missions we deliver today to keep our country safe and central to the future of our armed forces. As Britian moves to warfighting readiness through the commitments set out in our strategic defence review, we have placed defence personnel at the heart of our plans.

[Chris McDonald]

I thank my hon. Friend for his warm speech about the pride of the various regiments in the north-east of England, but there is a big gap at the moment. A number of years ago, the Durham Light Infantry lost their national memorial when the building that was housing it was no longer fit for purpose. That is a sad loss to our region. Will the hon. Gentleman join me in calling on the new Reform Durham county council to pick up the plans previously put down by local people to recreate a fitting memorial for the Durham Light Infantry in our area?

Nuclear-certified Aircraft Procurement

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Wednesday 25th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Maria Eagle]

The right hon. Gentleman is correct that the decision does all those things, and he has made a very good point.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I welcome the acquisition of the F-35As, not least for the impact it will have on industry and jobs in my constituency. In answer to the question about refuelling, the Minister described very well how this new capability meshes with existing NATO capability. Will she say a little more about how this capability supports the defence of not only the UK, but our NATO allies?

[Maria Eagle]

My hon. Friend is correct. In addition to the industrial benefits that we ought to glean from increasing the F-35 order, it is absolutely right that it strengthens NATO. That is what the strategic defence review said that we should focus on, and NATO first is what we are doing. Rejoining the NATO nuclear mission is a striking commitment. We accepted the recommendation to make that commitment and we are now implementing it.

Armed Forces Commissioner Bill

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Consideration of Lords amendments
Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, perhaps I could begin by referring briefly to the ten-minute rule Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham), which immediately preceded this debate. As a Navy wife, she clearly fully understands the vital role of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary in supporting our armed forces, and as the son of someone who served in the Royal Navy in the second world war, I have grown up to appreciate everything that the RFA does for us. It is a wonderful organisation. I was sitting on the Front Bench throughout her speech and I wish her Bill all the best.

As the shadow Armed Forces Minister, I rise to speak as a critical friend of the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill, driven by a commitment to ensuring that it delivers real and meaningful support for the brave men and women who serve our country. Our armed forces personnel deserve a system that honours their sacrifice and guarantees fairness, accountability and transparency when concerns arise.

To recap, the Bill at its core seeks to strengthen oversight by establishing an independent Armed Forces Commissioner modelled partly on the German system, with Ofsted-like powers to access military sites and relevant information for investigations. If implemented well, it could improve the lived experience of our servicemen and women, bolstering public confidence in how their issues are handled.

A truly independent, well-resourced commissioner is a vision that I believe commands support right across the House. Saying that, where are Reform Members? This is legislation that is designed to enhance the welfare of our armed forces and their families, so why are they not here? Having checked in Hansard, I know that they were not here yesterday either. They took no part in either of the urgent questions, and no part whatsoever in the statement or the very long debate that followed it. Why? It is because Reform Members do not do defence. They are one-club golfers with one single issue, and unfortunately the welfare of our armed forces personnel and their families does not seem to be it. Their empty Benches speak volumes, and while I am at it, are there any Scottish National party Members here? Oh well, they do not take this very seriously either, do they?

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I am pleased that the right hon. Gentleman has raised this point. I have sat in this House on, I think, all the occasions when we have been discussing defence, and I was also sorry to note that there were no Reform Members here for either the VE Day debate or the Remembrance Day debate. Does he agree that that shows the complete dereliction of a party that aspires to govern?

[Mr Francois]

For a party that sometimes likes to wrap itself in the flag, if I can put it like that, one would think that when it came to our armed forces, Reform would be more bothered. Empirically, that is not always the case. We are not allowed to take photographs in the Chamber—that is a mortal sin, Madam Deputy Speaker; it is an interview-without-coffee offence for you or the Speaker—but if we were allowed to take such a photo, or if someone else, perhaps outside the House, wanted to take such a photo, those empty Benches would speak volumes.

At the heart of the amendments we are debating today is the issue of whistleblowing. Admittedly, this issue was not much discussed in Committee in March, as I think the Minister would testify. At that time, the two key issues that emerged were the potential adverse effects of inheritance tax changes on death-in-service payments, on which I am afraid the Government have done virtually nothing, and VAT on school fees, including for military children. All I will say on the latter is that we eagerly await the outcome of the High Court case.

That brings me to the critical issue, which was debated at some length in the other place and is now before us: the need to empower the commissioner to investigate concerns raised by whistleblowers while protecting their anonymity. In the other place, our Opposition spokesperson, Baroness Goldie, argued passionately that the commissioner must have explicit authority to investigate whistleblowing concerns within the scope of this Bill centred on welfare and general service issues, to ensure that those raising concerns—whether service personnel, their families or friends—can do so anonymously. Indeed, the Minister in his “Dear Colleague” letter dated 30 May outlined that

“Baroness Goldie’s amendments raised an important debate”.

He says today that the amendments were well intentioned, and we agree. The Government, however, contend that existing mechanisms—a confidential hotline, investigation teams and improved complaints processes—are sufficient. This is where we do not agree. They argue that our amendment is unnecessary because it does not confer additional powers on the commissioner.

UK Nuclear Deterrent

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Monday 2nd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

As I replied to my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier), conversations continue between Members of this House and the Defence Secretary. He is open to further conversations to try to find a way forward, and I am certain that he would welcome a conversation with the hon. Gentleman.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

The Minister is right to highlight the nuclear deterrent as the cornerstone of our defence capability, but it is also a national effort. Will he join me in commending the unsung scientists and engineers at the Atomic Weapons Establishment for their world-leading and highly confidential work that ensures the ongoing independence of the UK’s nuclear deterrent?

[Luke Pollard]

I am very happy to do so. It is not just the scientists and engineers at the AWE who support our nuclear deterrent, but the engineers and apprentices in Devonport in my constituency who refit our nuclear submarines. The entire supply chain, from Rolls-Royce to BAE Systems, Babcock and countless other companies and organisations involved in this national endeavour, helps to keep our country safe. I commend all of them for their work and their contribution to our national security.

Oral Answers to Questions

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Monday 19th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I had the privilege last week of spending time on board HMS Sutherland, alongside the Armed Forces Minister. Will he join me in commending her captain and crew for their vital service safeguarding our subsea infrastructure? What steps are the Government taking to protect our critical undersea communications?

[Luke Pollard]

As HMS Sutherland is a Devonport-based warship, this Devonport-based MP says: congratulations to the crew, the ship’s company, the captain, and all those who made the visit to London so successful. The cross-party delegation visit was warmly received by the ship’s company. It is vital that we continue to invest in our capabilities, not just for protecting undersea infrastructure, but for anti-submarine warfare. Perhaps more important than the ship and the steel is investment in our people, and the Government are making precisely that investment.

Defence Industries: North-East

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Luke Myer]

I completely agree. I have one note of caution for our region: although we have fantastic manufacturers and SMEs, it is important for our regional economy—the one my hon. Friend and I share—to have a proper skills pipeline. There is a real job for our combined authority and our mayor to step up and work with education providers to ensure that proper planning is in place. My hon. Friend has a fantastic college in his constituency—Hartlepool college, which has inspirational leadership from its principal, Darren Hankey—but such colleges need to be joined up with local manufacturers, so that there is a proper skills pipeline.

All those manufacturers are vital for delivering local skills. Many of them offer advanced training and apprenticeships and ultimately provide high-quality, well-paid jobs in the areas that need them most. I recently met various manufacturers, both prime and SME, to discuss the issues that they face. They strongly welcome the Government’s decision to identify defence as one of the eight growth sectors in the industrial strategy. One manufacturer told me that it “puts defence in a different place” from where it was before. Manufacturers also welcome the decision to increase defence spending to 2.5%, the strategic defence review, the progress on trade with the US and the decision to step in to save British Steel. This Government are stepping up, not stepping back, and putting our strategic industries on a secure footing.

Just four months ago, I spoke in this Chamber during a debate secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland) on the challenges that SMEs face in defence procurement. I called for better access for SMEs to the pipeline. I was therefore pleased to see the Government’s recent commitment to set direct SME spending targets, and I hope that the Minister will provide further clarity on when those will be published. As it stands, SMEs in the defence sector are often contracted for one-off, short-term jobs, and that can create challenges. The unpredictable, project-based nature of the contracts makes it difficult for companies to commit to the up-front capital investment needed to grow.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is giving an excellent speech. I want to take this opportunity to thank the Minister for her recent visit to our Teesside defence and innovation cluster, where many small businesses, such as those my hon. Friend described, experience challenges in accessing procurement contracts. Does he agree that it is important for the Ministry of Defence to try harder to engage with small businesses further down the supply chain to help them develop capability, and to create visibility for them so that they can be sure of continuity of contracts and can invest in their own businesses and future growth?

[Luke Myer]

I agree. The best way to ensure that we are building the right approach to procurement is by listening directly to the SMEs that operate on the procurement frontline. I am grateful to the Minister for visiting Teesside to meet the defence and innovation cluster, and for visiting NETPark to meet other businesses. It is clear that she is listening, and that is welcome and appreciated.

Ukraine Update

Chris McDonald Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[John Healey]

To be quite honest with the hon. Gentleman, Belarus was not discussed. Russia is doing the active invasion and the attacks. Belarus is certainly an ally of President Putin, but not an active participant in this attack on Ukraine.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

In his statement, the Secretary of State was right to link the record level of spending on Ukraine with the opportunities for UK industry, but I am sure he would agree that that opportunity is also a challenge for the scale-up of the industry and the development cycle for new technologies. In addition to the support for innovation and financing, will is the Department considering additional measures to support our supply chains to build capability, so that organisations like our own defence cluster in Teesside can take their rightful place in supporting both Ukraine and the UK?

[John Healey]

We are indeed. My hon. Friend is completely right, and his long experience in industry bears that out. Having a productive capacity that is sovereign and in the UK is one thing, but if it cannot be supplied by the essential components and materials required, the strategic strength is undermined. We are very conscious of that as we develop a new defence industrial strategy, which we have not had in this country since the one produced in 2021.