(6 days, 21 hours 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 a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I thank the hon. Member for Fylde (Mr Snowden) for presenting the debate so well, and his passion, knowledge and deep interest are obvious. I support his plea: he, I and other Members in the Chamber wish to see any work retained in our own businesses, wherever those may be in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I also support his determination to ensure we retain the reputation as the world’s top fighting force.
It is a pleasure, as always, to see the Minister in his place—he has certainly earned his money in the last couple of days, and I am sure he will earn his money tomorrow as well. It is also a pleasure to see the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), in his place. He has a deep interest in these matters, and I wish him well in his contribution. The spokesperson for the Lib Dems, the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas), also has a passion for this issue.
As a boy—that was not yesterday, by the way; I can just about remember when I was a boy—I imagined being a fighter pilot. Imagine Jim Shannon being a fighter pilot! People in the Ards peninsula would be scared stiff at the very thought. That came from listening to local men telling stories of the second world war; my grandchildren look up to their grandfather, and I suppose that when I heard the soldiers and Air Force people who came back from the second world war telling their stories, that sparked an energy and an interest in the subject right away. When I think of Typhoon fighters, that little boy in me from 60-odd years ago is excited once more—excited for what we can do, and excited by what the Labour party and the Government wish to do. It is the right thing, and it inspires us all.
This land-based, multi-role fighter, capable of both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions, forms the bulk of the RAF’s combat air fleet alongside the F-35. It also forms the RAF’s quick reaction alert force, providing air defence in the UK and across the wider NATO airspace when deployed overseas.
On the quick reaction alert force, the NATO coverage and the contribution the Typhoon fighter would provide, does my hon. Friend agree that the proximity of the Irish Republic to the UK means that, in effect, we offer that nation some coverage and protection—which I presume we are quite happy to do—but at no cost to it whatever? Every NATO state has to pay considerably into NATO expenditure; the Republic pays nothing. Should our Government not approach the Government in the Republic to say, “We are covering for you. How about spending some of your money?”?
I thank my hon. Friend, who always instils words of wisdom in these debates. He is right: the Republic of Ireland is our neighbour, and we want to have an economic friendship and relationship with it—by the way, we do not want to be annexed by it, and we are quite clear where we are on that. However, we do provide F-35 and Typhoon aircraft coverage, which the Republic gets the benefit of. I am not sure whether anybody from the Republic of Ireland listens to these debates or even knows about them, but maybe even as we speak someone is cluing in and saying, “You know something? There is an obligation for us. Let’s do our part alongside the UK.”
The envy of the world, the RAF had 129 Typhoon aircraft, of which 107 are still in service. When he introduced the debate, the hon. Member for Fylde said that almost 21,000 people are employed across the UK in support of the Typhoon programme. It is estimated that the programme contributed £1.6 billion to the UK’s gross domestic product in 2020. Its importance cannot be denied.
My constituency of Strangford and the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) have large numbers of manufacturing jobs, so we understand how the lumbering allocation of contracts can bring hope—and then sometimes despair—to the workforce. I understand the frustration of the hon. Member for Fylde at the Government’s refusal to back British and ensure that our countries supply and make all possible goods.
I have argued the same case with the Ministry of Defence in relation to using Harland and Wolff in shipbuilding for defence contracts. My right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East, myself and my right hon. Friend the Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) have had a meeting within the last month to help ensure that the company can get more contracts. When the Minister replies, perhaps he can give us some encouragement for Northern Ireland in relation to procurement and contracts. We do not get the maximum we should out of defence contracts in Northern Ireland. We have a very skilled and able workforce, with apprenticeship opportunities, so we should focus on that.
I completely support the hon. Member for Fylde in his quest to ensure that the Ministry of Defence fulfils promises in a timely manner. As always, I am encouraged by Thales and the extra two Government contracts that have been put in place. There are now 200 new jobs there and apprenticeship opportunities. I have spoken to the management, who are very keen to ensure apprenticeship opportunities. I know some of them young fellas—I have known them since they were born—and they are the new apprentices and the new workforce for Thales.
It is not simply the future of manufacturing in Fylde that is at risk; it is the defence of this nation. Whenever we speak for something, we do so collectively. This is about the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England —working together. Those who serve this country in uniform come from all over, and we want to make sure we all get the benefit.
If the war with Russia and the Israel conflict have shown me anything, it is that those with the best weaponry have the upper hand. People seem to forget that, were it not for the Iron Dome defence system, Israel would have been rubble because of the incessant onslaught. If the Ukrainians did not have access to Thales lightweight multi-role missiles—LMMs—the battle against the might of Russia would be very different. I remember, in the first stages of the Ukraine war, the way that Thales LMMs were used to halt Russia’s advances and basically destroy its advance forces. They could be fired over the tops of houses and bungalows, and into the roads in between, to destroy the Russian armour. Those are the things that we should be promoting. When I saw them working in Ukraine, I was encouraged to know that some of my Strangford constituents—as well as probably some of the constituents of my hon. Friend the Member for East Londonderry and my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East—manufactured them, and that they were able to destroy and halt the Russian advance.
The capacity and capability of our armed forces are, of course, world renowned, and the availability of top-of-the-range Typhoons are part of that. We must have Government backing for our defence strategy. I do not doubt that that is coming, by the way—this is not a question for the Minister—but sometimes we need encouragement and reassurance, which I think is what the hon. Member for Fylde is seeking. He is right to do so for his constituents and, indeed, for this great nation. We must also have backing for our manufacturing industry, which is the backbone of this great nation.
I support the hon. Gentleman and look to the Minister for firm action behind the words of affirmation that are undoubtedly coming. The time for fulfilment is now, and our manufacturing industry is more than ready to fulfil. We can deliver. This great nation has done it before; we can do it again, and we should do it now.
(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberIt is an honour to follow the debate we just had in this House on remembrance and the contribution of the armed forces, and to have joined the public in marking Remembrance Sunday at St George’s Hall in Liverpool this weekend.
I am grateful for the opportunity to lead this debate on blood transfusions during the Falklands war. The reason I have secured the debate is primarily to tell a story—a rather remarkable story on behalf of one of my constituents, a veteran of the Falklands war. It is the story of blood transfusions that saved his life, but, as he later discovered, came at a profound cost.
My constituent, who prefers to remain anonymous, was a young man with 3rd Battalion, the Parachute Regiment. In 1982, his life was on the cusp of a new chapter —he was engaged to be married—but the outbreak of war put his future on hold. In the early hours of 12 June, during the fierce overnight fighting for Mount Longdon, he was severely wounded. After a 10-hour wait, he was evacuated to the hospital ship SS Uganda.
I commend the hon. Member on securing this debate, and I spoke to him beforehand. Does he not agree that the story of these British servicemen saved through blood donations from the ARA hospital ship is one of those times when honour in war was demonstrated? Does he not further agree that we must ensure that every man and woman trained to serve under our flag knows the obligations of duty and honour when they wear that noble uniform?
Absolutely, and I will develop the hon. Gentleman’s points.
To return to the story of my constituent, after that 10-hour delay and his move to the SS Uganda, he recalls waking from surgery to a nurse at his bedside who told him—I am quoting from his own testimony—that he had been
“filled up with Argentine blood”.
At the time, he thought nothing of it. He was simply grateful to be alive, surrounded as he was by those who were more seriously injured and knowing that many of his colleagues were not so lucky. He accepted it and got on with his life. He eventually married in 1985, and he and his wife have just celebrated 40 years of marriage.
However, the consequences of that lifesaving transfusion emerged years later. In 1993, after donating blood, he was diagnosed with hepatitis B. His wife and children were required to undergo preventive vaccinations. Later, he endured a brutal battle with kidney cancer, losing both kidneys and surviving five years on dialysis until a lifesaving transplant in 2017. Throughout that, the question of the origin of his hepatitis B lingered.
Reports about the infected blood scandal back here at home resonated deeply with my constituent, yet he finds himself in a cruel paradox: the Ministry of Defence, the institution he served, has so far refused to even acknowledge the fact that he received Argentine blood, saying only that it does not hold any recorded information related to blood transfusions during the Falklands war. Determined to get to the truth, my constituent began to conduct research into the events surrounding his blood transfusion. I must say, the evidence that he has gathered is astonishing. It includes records, telegrams, photographs and testimonies from all the people involved. That evidence pieces together a timeline of events, which I wish to share with the House tonight.
First, we must understand the logistical reality aboard the SS Uganda prior to my constituent’s injury. On 28 April 1982, the ship took aboard 360 units of blood from the Army blood supply depot at Ascension Island. Records kept by the ship’s crew, and obtained by my constituent, show that by 10 June, after expiries and transfers to other units, the SS Uganda was left with just 46 units of blood.
On 4 June 1982, the senior medical officer of the SS Uganda, Surgeon Captain Andrew Rintoul, met the captain of the Argentine ship Bahía Paraíso. Captain Rintoul’s own written account confirms that the Argentines
“generously offered to supply Uganda if urgently needed”
in accordance with Geneva rules. That urgent need arrived just days later, when the SS Uganda received 160 new British casualties, mainly from the bombing of the RFA Sir Galahad on 8 June. The numbers speak for themselves: how could 46 units possibly treat so many severely wounded patents?
Secondly, we have testimony from the medical professionals involved. From the British side, a senior nursing officer who served aboard the SS Uganda, told my constituent that she was aware that
“some supplies came from the Argentine hospital ships.”
Another former SS Uganda nurse recalls the “unique encounter” with the Bahía Paraíso, stating that blood was obtained from it for British patients.
From the Argentine side, the evidence is even more direct. My constituent has contacted several doctors who were aboard the ARA Bahía Paraíso. The biochemical lieutenant stated that the Argentines provided a considerable number of sachets of blood to the SS Uganda. He said:
“I swore the traditional and ancient Hippocratic oath. For that reason, both you and we treat the wounded regardless of which side they belong to.”
Another Argentine doctor, who physically visited the SS Uganda via the Bahía Paraíso’s Puma AE-506 helicopter, was asked whether English patients received Argentine blood. His answer was simple and definitive:
“Yes, sir, they received Argentine blood. We brought it to them.”
My constituent also managed to contact the sergeant aboard the helicopter, who confirmed:
“On 10 June 1982, we transported 250 litres of blood from hospital ship ARA Bahía Paraíso to hospital ship SS Uganda. We met several times to exchange wounded and medicines—a great example of military medical care in combat.”
In fact, the exchange was commended in Argentine media as part of the 40th anniversary of the war.
My constituent has dozens of photographs showing the Puma AE-506 helicopter landing on the SS Uganda; British and Argentine doctors and crew members together aboard the SS Uganda; and the SS Uganda plaque gifted to ARA Bahía Paraíso in thanks. It is important to state clearly that my constituent holds no ill will towards the medical staff—British or Argentine—who saved his life. He is grateful. They acted under the extreme duress of war, making a humanitarian choice in the best interests of their patients. Yet, that act of salvation also had lifelong consequences for him, and if it happened to him, it is likely that others among the hundreds of casualties treated after that date were similarly exposed. Should there not be an effort to identify and contact those veterans, to ensure that they too are aware?
The exchange between the ARA Bahía Paraíso and SS Uganda is no secret; it is a documented historical event. The evidence provided by my constituent is overwhelming, credible and drawn from multiple sources. All he is asking is that the Ministry of Defence acknowledges what the evidence so compellingly demonstrates. The refusal to do so is a heavy burden for him; it prevents him from achieving closure and, potentially, from seeking the specific recognition and support that may be available to him for a service-related illness.
My ask of the Minister this evening is simple: for the truth to be officially recognised. I urge her to meet my constituent and me to review the extensive dossier of evidence that he has so painstakingly assembled over the years. Then, we may finally recognise what the historical record already shows: that he and others received Argentine blood transfusions on the SS Uganda.
This is about according a veteran the simple dignity of truth. He served his country with great honour. He bore the physical and psychological wounds of that service. The very least he deserves is for his country to look at the facts and acknowledge what happened. I hope the Minister tonight can give him and this House a commitment to do just that.
(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI completely agree with my right hon. and gallant Friend—the history of the 14th Army is a proud one. It was a marvellous amalgam, under a brilliant leader, of people from countries and races from around the entire Commonwealth who fought with one common aim: freedom. They were sometimes called the forgotten army, but they are not forgotten tonight.
After the horrors of the trenches and an understandable aversion to war in the 1920s, with Britain exhausted—both financially and emotionally—by the horrors of the great war, the Government of the day introduced what came to be known as the 10-year rule. This was not just the policy of the War Office or the Admiralty, as they then were; it was a pan-Whitehall edict, the essence of which was that Britain would not have to fight another major war for at least 10 years. This key planning assumption became the centrepiece of British strategic theory and, with strong endorsement from the Treasury, the 10-year rule soon became a rolling one, extended on an annual basis. Given that no war was expected for at least a decade, this allowed for major economies in the financing of the armed forces and an associated running-down of all three services. As one example of how seriously the 10-year rule was taken and implemented, even Winston Churchill during his time as Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 1920s exerted pressure to cut back on his beloved Royal Navy—the same service he had fought tenaciously to expand as First Lord of the Admiralty barely a decade before.
Indeed, as a mood of pacifism gripped the nation, in 1933—the same year in which Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany—the earnest students of the Oxford Union, who are having their own problems at the moment, passed a motion by a majority of over two to one that
“this House will under no circumstances fight for its King and country”.
The subsequent policy of appeasement from the 1930s British establishment—the blob of their day—was as erroneous then as it would be today. Authoritarian dictators tend to admire strength, particularly their own, and despise weakness—a lesson that any British Government, including this one, would do well to remember. History tells us again and again that the appeasement of dictators does not work, just as it failed to work in the 1930s
The 10-year rule, which by that stage had lasted well over a decade, was eventually rescinded in 1935-36 as Britain began to rearm in response to Hitler’s increasingly bellicose behaviour. Nevertheless, that rearmament, and comparable action by our allies, was ultimately insufficient to deter what then became the second world war—a brutal conflict in which over 50 million people died, far more even than had perished in the supposed war to end all wars some two decades before.
I mention all this not just because I studied history and then military history at university, but because if—as Members of this House believe, and as I have always believed—the ultimate goal of our armed forces is to save lives by deterring war and persuading any potential aggressor that they could not prevail, then even today we all need to ask ourselves, regardless of party, whether we are doing enough to secure the peace by maintaining sufficiently strong armed forces to provide such a vital deterrent effect. It is a historical fact that twice in the last century, this country paid an immense cost in both blood and treasure to defeat militarism.
Today, the threats are somewhat different, with a war on our doorstep in Europe following Russia’s barbaric and illegal invasion of Ukraine. The Ukrainians are in effect now fighting for our freedom too, and we must back them to the hilt as a result. We also see a major rearmament by China; North Korea continues to develop even longer-range intercontinental ballistic missiles, now with support from Russia; and Iran continues to exert malign influence across the middle east, even after the successful American strike on its emerging nuclear capabilities. The circumstances may have changed, but the principle remains exactly the same. We in the western democracies cannot drop our guard against the growing powers of the 21st-century autocracies—something that those who fought in the second world war would instinctively understand only too well.
Bearing in mind the Minister’s caution, I was genuinely concerned to read one passage of the Government’s recent strategic defence review—its seminal defence policy document. On page 43, under the heading “Transforming UK Warfighting”, it states:
“This Review charts a new era for Defence, restoring the UK’s ability to deter, fight, and win—with allies—against states with advanced military forces by 2035.”
I say to the Minister in all sincerity that that seems to contain an echo of the 10-year rule of the 1920s. While there was a great deal of good in the SDR, not least the intention to speed up our highly bureaucratic procurement system—about which I have always held firm views, as the Minister knows—I nevertheless worry, given increasing threats from Russia and now also from China, about whether the Ministry of Defence today displays the genuine sense of urgency that is required to meet the challenges we now all clearly face. Before I am accused of selective quoting, the same paragraph of the SDR goes on to say:
“This vision could be achieved more quickly should circumstances demand it and should more resources be made available.”
Notwithstanding those words, with much of the new money in the SDR unavailable for at least two years and a multibillion-pound programme of in-year efficiency savings now under way, I merely ask whether we have really learned the lessons of the past century as well as we might have.
In conclusion, we in these islands have always ultimately been prepared to make great sacrifices to uphold the freedom of Europe, and indeed of the wider world. That is why, given our history, we should never forget that the first duty of Government remains the defence of the realm. In response to the philosopher Edmund Burke’s famous challenge that all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing, twice in the past century our own good men and women across the nation stood up to and defeated such evil, with our armed forces in the lead. Rightfully, we solemnly remember that sacrifice each and every November, including in this House tonight.
While we are celebrating and remembering the greatest generation, we also have the potential to build our young people into being the best generation. Perhaps we should be focusing on that as well—looking back, but also looking forward, as I think the Minister said. We must try to raise a generation of young people who are proud to be British, to stand against repression, and to undertake to be inclusive. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that that is what we need to build for?
As a young person myself, having recently turned 60—[Laughter.] In all seriousness, at the remembrances services that I attended this weekend—like, I am sure, many Members on both sides of the House—I was struck by the number of young people from, for instance, the Cubs, the Scouts and the Brownies who attended those services and, in many cases, participated, and laid tributes, wreaths and crosses of their own. I took great heart from that, and I believe that there is hope yet.
There would be no greater betrayal of the sacrifices that we have been debating this evening than would occur if we as a House, with all the other matters that we have to consider, somehow became so distracted or complacent that we failed to act with sufficient clarity of purpose and determination to deter a future major conflict, perhaps even a global one, from breaking out again in our lifetimes. To put it, perhaps, in another way, we must now conduct ourselves, in “our today”, in such a way as never to risk the security of “our tomorrow”. With that sincere warning, I pay tribute to our valiant armed forces, both past and present, and to everything that they do, day in and day out, to keep us and our country safe and free—lest we forget.
First, I declare an interest, having been a member of the Ulster Defence Regiment and the Royal Artillery for some 14 and a half years of part-time service. Like others, I know what it is like to lose colleagues and loved ones in the name of safety, security, democracy and freedom.
I represent Strangford constituency, where conscription was never needed. In a nation of volunteers, we were always a constituency of volunteers. I know I am not the only person who was so upset to hear on TV last week the 100-year-old veteran question the point of his sacrifice, and the sacrifice of his colleagues. What a chord it struck to know that this man is looking around at the modern-day UK and wondering what it was all for. These are the men and women to whom the flag means something, and for whom loyalty to the Crown was worth shedding blood. They believed that it was worth giving their life for those in their community. They are the generation who went to war because they knew what was needed. They worked hard, they played hard, and they are proud of their history and their heritage. I watched as my community was ravaged by terrorism, and I now see those who protected the community being ravaged by vexatious attempts to rewrite history.
These men and women wonder whether it was worth shedding the blood that was shed. I say: yes, it was worth it. I look at my six grandchildren and believe it was worth it, and that all is not lost. In them is the hope of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which works hard, plays hard, keeps calm and carries on. In them will the stories of war heroes such as Blair Mayne live on. We will teach them that they need not be ashamed of their pride in being British, and need not apologise for being Ulster Scots, or for being who they are. We talk of the greatest generation; we have the potential to build our young people into being the best generation. That is why it was worth it. That is why it is worth this Chamber deciding that the lessons of the world wars and the Holocaust should be taught in every school in this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That is why it is worth this House remembering and celebrating those men and women, and I do so today, along with others who have spoken.
I think of those men and women and I thank God for what they did. I ask God for his help in raising tomorrow’s young people—my grandchildren and yours—so that they are proud to be British, to stand against oppression, and to undertake to be inclusive. We in this House should listen to the veteran Alec Penstone. He served his nation with courage and watched his friends being killed on D-day. We need to restore British values, British justice and British pride. The battle is as essential to the future of this nation as any that we have ever fought. I will fight alongside others for Crown and country, freedom and democracy, justice and liberty, and the future of my children and my grandchildren, and everyone’s grandchildren. We remember the past—of course we do—but we also look to the future, with grateful thanks for the sacrifice that gave us freedom, liberty and democracy. That, we can never forget.
(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberI do indeed. If big countries believe that they can redraw international boundaries by force and get away with it, then no democracy and no state is safe. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that a secure, sovereign Ukraine is central to Europe’s security in future.
I thank the Secretary of State for his answers. Reports in the newspapers indicate that 150,000 new Russian soldiers are being prepared for an onslaught in eastern Ukraine. I do not doubt for one second that the Secretary of State, the Labour Government and this Parliament are committed to doing something, but reports seem to indicate that other countries are slowing down on what they give. Has he been able to encourage other countries to ensure that they replicate what we give?
The answer is yes, through the Ukraine Defence Contact Group—50 nations that have committed to stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes. Together, we have secured £50 billion of pledges of military aid to Ukraine in this year alone, and I am proud of the way that the UK has stepped in, alongside Germany, to lead that group. It is part of what we are doing, with others, to step up support for Ukraine, which will be needed even more in the months to come.
(3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Liz Jarvis
I agree with my hon. Friend.
Too often, the system fails to provide a simple, supported handover to civilian healthcare, or advice on housing, employment and benefits. Charities and veterans’ groups are calling for an independent review of the medical discharge process across all services to make it consistent, compassionate and genuinely supportive, so that no disabled veteran falls through the cracks, or is left without the best possible support.
I commend the hon. Lady on bringing forward this debate. The armed forces covenant in Northern Ireland needs to be upgraded as well. The covenant is only as good as the authority that implements it. Does she agree that a review must be carried out to ensure improvements in how our veterans are helped, especially those who have been left with physical or mental trauma? We must review the situation in every constituency of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Every soldier needs to be looked after.
Liz Jarvis
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention.
According to Help for Heroes, veterans with complex mental health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder, often face long waits for mental health treatment. Although the armed forces covenant promises priority treatment for service-related conditions, the reality on the ground can fall short. In England, Op Courage is a welcome single front door for veteran mental health, but there remain issues with consistency, capacity and specialist expertise. We need an improved Op Courage pathway with a common assessment tool, better signposting from GPs and acute trusts, and an explicit requirement that practitioners delivering care have expertise in military mental health. Access should be seamless across the UK, so that when it comes to support, there is no postcode lottery.
I thank the Minister for all her answers, and I wish her well in her new position. She will be aware of the charity Beyond the Battlefield in Portavogie, in my constituency, which looks after soldiers across Northern Ireland who fall between the cracks. May I extend an invitation to her? It would be lovely to see her in Portavogie and Strangford, and I know that the people there would be encouraged by a visit from her.
Louise Sandher-Jones
I certainly hope to visit Northern Ireland soon, and I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s invitation.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I congratulate the hon. and gallant Minister on his elevation, which is well deserved, an on the comment he made about not be intimidated. He speaks for us all in that regard—indeed, I almost feel a poster campaign coming, about standing firm. The incursion of Russian drones into a NATO member nation is a slap in the face for the very idea of NATO and must be dealt with effectively and immediately. What collective discussions will be held within NATO to determine a robust response to the testing of our borders and the resolution to stand fast against Russia?
Al Carns
I thank the hon. Member for his question and his support for defence. Discussions in the E5 are ongoing as we speak, and the NAC has sat and will continue to discuss this issue. I can guarantee him that the UK will be at the very centre of those discussions and no one will intimidate this great isle at all.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI take that as a strong early bid, and I am happy to talk to the hon. Gentleman about how we can maximise skills in his constituency.
I thank the Minister very much for the incredibly good news that he and the Labour Government have delivered today in this Chamber. Every one of us across this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will relish the idea of jobs coming our way.
We in the Democratic Unionist party welcome the defence industrial strategy, acknowledging the need for world-class defence and making the most of our world-class defence businesses. One of those, Thales, employs hundreds of my Strangford constituents, and it has been instrumental in protecting Ukraine. There were some 200 new jobs—including, I understand, 30 apprenticeships—no more than three months ago. With news circulating that defence spending commitments will create a total of 85,000 jobs across the sector in the next 10 years, will the Minister reaffirm the role of Northern Ireland in the industry and indeed in the defence of this great nation?
Let me be very clear: there are growth opportunities in every nation and region of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland. We have today announced a defence growth deal for Northern Ireland, which builds on the incredible skills that we already see in defence companies in Northern Ireland. This Government were very proud to announce the £1.6 billion contract for the lightweight multirole missile, which will be built in Northern Ireland. It will be used to shoot down Russian drones attacking our allies in Ukraine, which is precisely how we can make defence an engine of growth as well as support our security objectives. The workers in Northern Ireland should be very proud of the work they are doing; I certainly am.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberTo a Minister just promoted by the son of a toolmaker in the reshuffle, tooling is a very appropriate question. We are targeting more of the increased defence budget at British companies, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, with the development of the new defence SME hub, which will allow more SMEs to access the defence contracts we are providing as part of our growing renewal of our armed forces. I would be very happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss her constituency business.
I thank the Minister, who is a regular visitor to Northern Ireland, for his answers. Thales has received significant contract work from the Ministry of Defence, with 200 jobs coming out of that, and Spirit AeroSystems has also achieved some of that, with extra jobs, but many other defence companies could also take advantage. Will the Minister confirm that those other companies will have the same opportunities?
I am very happy to say that we are seeking growth in defence businesses in every part of the United Kingdom. When we launch the defence industrial strategy very shortly, I hope the hon. Gentleman will be able to see one of the new defence growth zones in Northern Ireland providing opportunities for young people to start new good careers in defence. Also, companies that might not think of themselves as defence companies at the moment will be able not just to sell to UK armed forces, but to take export opportunities selling to our allies around the world.
(2 months, 2 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 a real pleasure to serve under your chairship again, Ms Lewell. I commend the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) for setting the scene so well. I had hoped to see more people at this debate; I expected a full house. This is about modern technology—this is the future—and something we really have to look at. There are fantastic benefits to using drones in our defence sector. It is a real pleasure to see the Minister in his place again; he is becoming a regular in Westminster Hall. He is trying to catch me up, and I am sure he is almost there.
Drones can provide real-time intelligence and access hard-to-see areas, providing essential information for local armies and for the Government—I will mention some roles outside of defence in which they can be effective. We must make sure they are used correctly and to the best of our ability. It is great to be here to discuss that. I was sitting here thinking about drones, and I can remember, because of my age, the first episode of “Star Trek” with the laser guns and “Beam me up, Scotty.” We are not yet at that stage, but I do wonder whether one day we will be. It would be great for an MP living in Northern Ireland: I could be in my office at 9 o’clock and at 25 past be beamed over to Westminster. I know that is fictional and highly improbable, but drones were once highly improbable, and now they are not. They were once fictional, but now they are reality.
We can cast our minds back to The Terminator films, in which drones chase the Terminator and other people about. That shows what can happen, and that is what is happening today in Ukraine. Fictional things of the past that we thought were not going to happen clearly can happen—and perhaps they will. I am not sure whether anybody else saw in the paper yesterday that China seems to have a laser attack capability. There was a tank in the square, on parade yesterday, that has laser capabilities and could be the weapon of the future. Again, it is early days, but who can say it will not happen sometime in the future?
In February 2024, the UK Ministry of Defence launched a defence drone strategy backed by a £4.5 billion investment over the next decade. There is a need for new advanced technology, especially after the conflict we have witnessed in Ukraine. When I watch the things happening in Ukraine, I find them almost inconceivable; I know others feel the same. We see innocent civilians in their gardens or going to the shops and children coming back from school being targeted by Russian drones—the Russians know fine rightly that those are innocent civilians and yet they attack and kill them. On the buses there are no army personnel; they are civilians. The Russians know exactly what they are doing with the drones. Russia has shown technology at its worst. We should be aware of what is happening.
I was watching TV last week. A civilian journalist and cameraman went down to the battlefront in Donetsk. A drone followed them; they got under the trees and hid there. When they were driving down there, there were net-type things over the roads that deflect the drone activity. These are some of the things that have to be done, but technology is moving so fast. What we thought in the past would never happen is happening today. That tells me that in the future, when I will probably not be here, there will be even more of the impossible becoming the reality.
The UK Government have invested over £40 million in radio frequency-directed weapons research. I thank the Government for that as well as the previous Minister, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge). To give him some credit, when he was in government he made regular visits to Thales in Belfast and across Northern Ireland, and he—now the shadow Minister—recognised the importance of the new technology. I know the present Minister and the Government feel the same way, so there is no dispute and they will continue with that policy. I am convinced of that.
There are 135 skilled jobs at Thales in Northern Ireland offering further support in our defence. My right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) and I visited Thales in his constituency last year to ascertain where it was going. I was incredibly impressed by the modern technology and how we are leading the way. I am also pleased that when it comes to technology in modern warfare, there is a real Government policy, of the previous Government and this one, to ensure that all parts of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland can take advantage of it. I thank them for that.
To look at a different angle, the Police Service of Northern Ireland uses drones in operational support and border surveillance. It can keep track of what is happening in border areas. It also supports police officers on the ground. There are other ways of doing things and we have to acknowledge what those ways are. Are they effective? Yes, they are. Can they help and do the job? Yes, they can. They assist in monitoring crime hotspots as well. When someone is involved in drugs, antisocial behaviour, attacks, assaults or whatever it may be, a drone in the air can spot that person, providing an evidential base for the future. Drones are used in search and rescue and managing public disorder. Let us not forget that the eye in the sky is keeping an eye on us when we are on the streets, as happens in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
As everyone knows, I represent Strangford. Boats in Strangford lough have unfortunately got lost or have overturned over the years, and one of the ways of doing search and rescue is to use a drone. When young people go missing, drones are used to ascertain where they were. Unfortunately, on the occasions that I can recall us hoping to find someone alive, that did not always work out, but drones did help with the search and rescue. That is what the PSNI and other organisations are doing, and we have to recognise the good that that brings.
Drones are crucial for situational awareness and enable personnel to make quicker and more effective decisions. The soldier of today is much better equipped, more able and more experienced in modern technology than soldiers would have been in the past. Drones allow for constant surveillance and the detection of enemy movements or illegal activity. More importantly, they enable early intervention, which can reduce casualties and military deaths, making sure that those who do their best for our safety are as protected and safe as possible.
Numerous manufacturers across this nation are more than capable of making and supplying drones for our defence industry. I am told by my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East that 60% of the workforce at Thales, in my neighbouring constituency, comes from Strangford. We are very pleased to make a direct contribution to the Thales workforce. The efforts that they make are critical for defence.
There is a real opportunity to progress technological warfare and to share data with our allies, especially the US. One day, we will have our drones, others will then find a way of deflecting the drone, another side will get another way of modifying the technology, and then we will have to come back again with something else—it is always going to evolve. We have to support the Government’s commitment to spending money on cyber-security and drone technology, and we thank the Government for it. Drones are a key element of UK defence. They aim to enhance our national security and, importantly, protect lives. We must invest wisely in their use.
We must also remember the opportunities for local people. Thales employed 200 new people, some of whom were apprentices. The apprentices receive a level of remuneration that makes them want to stay there. I know some of the young apprentices; the company was paying their student fees so that they would stay, because Thales wants to have a level of technological advantage by bringing in people at an early stage. That is a point about employment and job creation.
I look to the Minister to ensure that we can continue to be a leading nation in surveillance and drone defence, and to commit to proving that over the next decade. I know that he will, but we must all be focused on that.
(2 months, 2 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
Thank you for giving me the chance to speak, Sir Desmond. I thank the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) for allowing us all to sow into this debate, and boy did he set the right tone for it. Every one of us respects him for that—well done to him. I am pleased to see the hon. and gallant Minister in his place. He understands the issues that we talk about because he has lived them, and I very much look forward to his response to our contributions on a subject that we all love. It is a pleasure to see the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), in his place; we see his passion for this subject in every intervention he makes on it. I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. and gallant Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire)—she has served as well—in advance for her contribution, too.
Members will be aware—I am always very proud to say this—that I served in the Territorial Army, the Royal Artillery and the Ulster Defence Regiment for some 14 and a half years as a part-time soldier, both in an anti-terrorism role and at the time of the iron curtain. I believe that gives me a small understanding of what service means, and I regard it with great honour. Having seen the impact of service on so many of my comrades over the years, it is with that personal view that I approach discussions concerning our veterans. The Minister encapsulates—I am not giving him a big head—the thing that I want for our veterans and, I think, that we all want for our veterans. We thank him for standing by them, as he always does.
I am aware that, as time moves on and values change, a shifting narrative of the wars and the actions that we took is appearing. The acts of courage and valour that we once held as a gold standard are increasingly being seen by some as acts of shame, and that concerns me greatly. Today, we sometimes look on those acts through a distorted modern lens that could never accurately portray the reality of war in the 1900s, or of the RAF during the second world war, which this debate is all about. I believe that the greatest commemoration of the battle of Britain is the education of our children to accurately reflect that war and the lessons learned, and I will try to focus on that.
We must ensure that every cycle of children who go through school receives more than simply an hour-long lesson on a battle fought back in the 1900s, as our young people now categorise anything that is over 20 years old. As a pensioner—indeed, well by a pensioner— I listen to my grandchildren and children, and they perhaps do not always see the sacrifices made over the years. Children must be taught the reasons the war was fought and the bravery of those who boarded the ships on D-day, those on the planes at the battle of Britain, which everyone has spoken about, and those behind the intelligence gathering that allowed men of influence to make decisions that they knew would sacrifice the lives of thousands to save the lives of millions. The hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) referred to Winston Churchill’s words:
“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
As we all know, Winston Churchill was an incredible capturer of the English language and was able to say things with words that were so effective and helped the nation.
While I absolutely support the hon. Member for Tewkesbury in his wish to recognise the battle of Britain as one of the most important battles of the 20th century, it is my firm belief that true commemoration has to be much more than that. There has to be a determination to ensure that true history is not skewed or changed, but honoured in our education systems. The battle of Britain is certainly worthy of that honour.
Northern Ireland more than played her part in that battle, and I want to give a couple of examples of the role of the RAF in Northern Ireland. In my constituency of Strangford, the RAF was stationed at Ards airport and at Ballyhalbert airport, where the Polish squadron was based. About 10 years ago, a memorial was made at the Ards war memorial in Ards town for the Polish pilots. Some of them came and died in their battles, but some came and stayed. I always say that when any young men such as those pilots come to Northern Ireland and meet a Northern Irish girl, she is always special. More often than not, they do not go home; they stay in Northern Ireland. We happen to have that talent, I believe, among us menfolk. I am a one-woman man, by the way—I make that very clear. My wife has been very good for me over the years and has settled me down a bit, and I thank her for making that be the case. Without her I would not be half the man I am.
The tradition of RAF service in my constituency has also been carried through by the air cadets. In Regent House school in Newtownards, we have one of the largest detachments of air cadets. I am always minded— I attended a memorial service just before Easter—that 1,000 people or thereabouts were killed when the Luftwaffe attacked shipbuilding and aerospace sites during the Belfast blitz. I do not know why, but the Luftwaffe came down and bombed Newtownards as well, and 13 young Irish Fusiliers were killed. It is sometimes good to remember that the battles were not only in London, or in the north-east, Scotland and Wales, but in Northern Ireland, when the Luftwaffe went straight across to Northern Ireland, but our men and women of course served in uniform, and conscription was never needed there.
Northern Ireland has a proud aviation history, and it hosted military airfields such as RAF Sydenham. Those facilities were used by various squadrons, including those of the United States air force and of Polish forces. Again, that is a reminder that the horrors of war did not stop at Dover, but carried right on over. Northern Ireland produced vital fighter pilots for the battle of Britain, with at least some 28 serving. Notable among them was Brendan Finucane, one of the Irish pilots who fought for Britain. We sometimes need to be reminded that the Irish nation also contributed to the war against Nazism. The Republic of Ireland stayed neutral during the war, but there were many who fought, and today many serve in uniform in the Northern Irish regiments and those here on the mainland as well.
Belfast was a major industrial centre and made significant contributions to the allied war effort by producing naval ships, aircraft and munitions, which made it a target for the Luftwaffe during the Belfast blitz. Northern Ireland hosted the crucial No. 9 Group RAF headquarters at RAF Barton Hall. It was established in September 1940 to control fighter operations in north-west England and Northern Ireland, including bases such as RAF Limavady and RAF Ballykelly, which were vital for protecting Atlantic convoys. Churchill said that Northern Ireland’s contribution in the war was of such significance because we helped the convoys coming over from the United States and had our Air Force there to respond.
The naval historian John Hewitt made clear the role of Northern Ireland in our victory in the second world war when he stated very clearly:
“If we hadn’t won the Battle of Britain the Nazis would have invaded England and there’s no doubt about it. We would not have the freedom that we have today and Northern Ireland’s fighter pilots played a key role.”
However, I am not convinced that schools throughout the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are explaining this history, and I believe we need to do that as the ultimate tribute to and commemoration of the battle of Britain. We need to once again instil a pride in our armed forces, whose courage and loyalty is the stuff of legends and worthy of our honour and regard.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Tewkesbury, and indeed every Member who has spoken or intervened, on what has been an incredible debate and one of those debates that has inspired us. I look to the Minister to bring to the Cabinet the determination we have, and which I know he has, to teach such commemoration and allow our children to once again have that pride in being British. I love telling people that I am British because I am proud to be British. We stood alone and faced a threat of terror and oppression, and the blood that ran through the veins of the people in those days still runs through each of ours. We must honour that and honour them in living memory.