Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Graham Leadbitter and Luke Pollard(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
The strategic defence review, published this month, clearly states:
“The foundation of the UK’s approach to deterrence remains a minimum, credible, independent UK nuclear deterrent, assigned to the defence of NATO… The UK’s nuclear weapons are operationally independent.”
Somehow, in the last 29 days, the UK Government have decided that they no longer see their Trident nuclear missiles as a minimum credible deterrent. Why was that major change in policy not announced in the SDR?
Luke Pollard
The Government have made it very clear that our support for our independent nuclear deterrent is solid and is not changing. We are investing in new submarines, we are investing in the base in Faslane, we are investing in new nuclear reactors in Derby, and we are backing the people who keep our country safe with that guarantor of our security, the nuclear deterrent.
Armed Forces Day
Debate between Graham Leadbitter and Luke Pollard(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Luke Pollard
I am sure the House will agree that the right hon. Gentleman is by no means a poor substitute for the shadow Defence Secretary.
We plan to publish our defence housing strategy later this year, which no doubt was not at all in the minds of the shadow Front-Bench team when they published their proposals ahead of time. I encourage the right hon. Gentleman to wait for the full work to be published in due course, but improving defence housing has to be a priority, because for many years as a nation, we have not delivered what our forces deserve—that will now change.
This year, we extended the ability to reclaim the costs of wraparound childcare to many of those deployed overseas, and next year we will go further and cover all overseas areas to help make family life a little easier. We are legislating for an Armed Forces Commissioner—an independent voice to help improve service life. We made a manifesto commitment to bring the armed forces covenant fully into law—a promise made by the nation that those who defend it will be treated fairly and will not be disadvantaged because of their service. That includes, for example, ensuring that service children have the same access to education as other children. We are transforming recruitment, and hope that many young people will be inspired to join up after attending Armed Forces Day events this weekend. We are also overhauling access to care and support for veterans through the Valour programme.
I turn to veterans because although Armed Forces Day is an opportunity to thank those people in uniform, we should also use it as an opportunity to thank those people who have served.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
I very much welcome the work being done to bring the covenant into wider, and legislative, effect, with consequences where it is not applied. That will be important in delivering services to our armed forces right across the public sector, but there is a financial consequence. Parliament and Government need to seriously consider how that financial consequence is borne and distributed to ensure that those public services are empowered and financed to support armed forces personnel and, just as importantly, their wider families in the best way they can.
UK Military Base Protection
Debate between Graham Leadbitter and Luke Pollard(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Luke Pollard
My hon. Friend is exactly right about the disrespect shown to our forces and their personnel. The threat to our national security posed by breaching the security of a military base and approaching military assets is something that we take incredibly seriously. The British public want to know that the full force of the law is being used to locate those responsible and bring them to justice, and I can confirm that the investigation is ongoing. The steps that the Home Secretary has taken today to proscribe Palestine Action are entirely consistent with the severity and seriousness of its activities.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
The actions of Palestine Action at Brize Norton last week were utterly reprehensible and will have caused fear and alarm for military personnel and their families across the country, including in my own constituency, which has three substantial military bases. At the same time, though, the UK Government are not ruling out engaging in further military conflict in the middle east. The Minister mentioned the importance of the international rules-based order. How can the UK Government seriously be considering engaging in further military intervention abroad, given that years of under-investment has diminished security at bases right here in the UK, which causes concern for our armed forces personnel and their families?
Luke Pollard
I thank the hon. Member for his question, and for his obvious concern for our armed forces. The statement that I made today and the statements made by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Defence Secretary over the past few days clearly underline that the deployment of UK military force in the middle east is to defend our people and our bases. It is worth reminding ourselves why we have a UK military presence in the middle east: to support regional stability and to undertake counter-Daesh operations in Iraq and Syria. They are the same operations that help keep the streets of Britain safe from terrorists. That is the reason we have a presence in the middle east—securing our allies—and it is why the Prime Minister flowed forward additional jets to provide cover and support for our armed forces personnel. As we assess what is taking place currently, we reserve the right to make further military changes to ensure that our people are kept safe.