(4 days, 11 hours ago)
Commons ChamberIf my hon. Friend will permit me, I will double-check with my colleagues in the Department that leads on that and write to her with the latest position on the Abramovich billions.
The Secretary of State always speaks softly but firmly; we thank him for that. He represents the views of the people. The news that Russia is seeking peace talks is certainly heartening, but how will the Secretary of State ensure that Russia understands that it is not, and never will be, peace at any price? The allies will continue to support Ukraine until a sustainable peace is achieved and will not force Ukraine to accept a deal that does not honour the sacrifice—of life, grief, the loss of education and hope of a future—that so many Ukrainians have made over so many years.
If I may say so, that was a very moving contribution. Part of the power of this place is not just Ministers and Government accounting to Parliament, but Parliament finding its voice in exactly the way that the hon. Gentleman said. He asks about my message to Putin. His own message and the message from this House this afternoon are strong and clear.
(2 weeks, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberI beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross to Blair Mayne.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Backbench Business Committee very much for the opportunity to secure this debate, as well as Members who have taken time before the recess to come and make a contribution. I am truly thankful for the recognition of the importance of this debate in this Chamber. This is not merely about a Newtownards boy and his exploits, although I will tell of those; this is about how we as a House honour our veteran heroes and ensure that that honour is properly recorded.
At a time when veterans can feel that their service is a thing of shame, the importance of recognition goes to every service personnel member throughout the country. I know that that means so much to so many in Newtownards and my home town of Strangford, and I am thankful that this debate has been deemed worthy of being held here in the greatest seat of democracy. I am pleased to see the Minister for Veterans and People in his place, honourable and gallant Member that he is, and I thank him for coming along. I am also pleased to see the shadow Minister and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson in their places.
I am no writer like Damien Lewis, whose work on Blair Mayne and the foundation of the Special Air Service is unparalleled. However, allow this Ballywalter boy to retell the stories that I heard the old men in the town rhyme off in my youth, as a crowd of us listened in awe about how one of us could achieve so much. Imagine being an eight, nine or 10-year-old, with all these old soldiers from the second world war telling all these great stories, and always having wanted be a Royal Marine commando, as I did as a wee boy—I never achieved that, by the way; the Minister for Veterans and People did. I managed to get to the Ulster Defence Regiment and the Royal Artillery. That was not second best, by the way, but it was not as good as what I wanted as an eight-year-old.
We listened to the stories of those soldiers, and I ask Members, briefly, to listen to a scene of what happened. The air is filled with the screams of the dying and the stench of the dead. You are gasping for breath as your lungs take in gulps of gunpowder-tinged air. You are lying in a ditch. The enemy is firing so often without break that the rat-tat-tat of bullets merges together. You know that each searing breath may well be your last. The officer you look to for direction is dead. Deep in your heart you believe that it will take a miracle to lift you from this scene of hell.
Suddenly, you hear something different: the roaring of an engine, a jeep. With your last vestige of energy you lift your head, and with stinging eyes you make out the form of a jeep cutting through the madness and mayhem. The man on board fires at the enemy like an avenging angel. He slows the jeep down at the ditch, and on his way past he calls, “I’ll pick you up on the way back.” Nothing flowery—no grand words, just a promise that perhaps it is not time for you to go just yet.
With a hammering heart, you watch as the man in the jeep forces the enemy to retreat, despite the fact that the enemy holds all the advantages of position, men and firepower. As the enemy retreats, the jeep turns round. This time it stops. The avenging angel jumps to the ground amid a hail of bullets and holds out his hand. Shaking, you grasp that hand as you are bundled in with your 11 colleagues and driven wildly to safety. As you look to see what form your angel takes, you see this crazy Ulster man—we are not all crazy, by the way, but we are all very brave, although I wouldn’t be as brave as this man. It is Paddy Mayne, and everything falls into place in just that one second. He is a man known for bravery and courage, and for leading his men to victory—a man who is, and in your eyes and the eyes of your surviving family will forever remain, a hero of epic fame.
That is a true story about Lieutenant Colonel Blair Mayne’s actions, as seen by one of the men who was saved by Paddy, as he was affectionately known. The story does not take into account that before Mayne and Lieutenant Scott had driven the jeep into oncoming enemy fire, Mayne had summed up the situation. That was what he could do: he could lead from the front, as a leader of soldiers, with courage and determination. He was a man who was born for that time.
Ever a man of initiative and action, Paddy entered the first house that formed the enemy defences. After checking to ensure that the enemy was dead, he moved out into the open and fired into the next house, taking out those behind the enemy fire, before moving in to ensure that none of the enemy remained. Paddy Blair Mayne was a colossus of a man who stood tall, commanded his men and inspired bravery and loyalty.
After ensuring a clean sweep, he turned his attention to how best to save the trapped point men of the squadron. He knew that the enemy was well ensconced in the forest, with no way to surround them, and he departed on what seemed like a suicide mission to rescue those men. Not only did Paddy manage to rescue his colleagues, but he forced a retreat from the enemy and helped the allies to advance at a time when they were held up.
It has been said that a level-one award, such as the Victoria Cross, is given only when the chance of death is 50% or more. A report from Brigadier Calvert, dated June 1945, said:
“There can only be one explanation why Colonel Mayne was not killed by what had already proved deadly and concentrated fire: the sheer audacity and daring which he showed in driving his jeep across a field of fire momentarily bewildering the enemy.”
He continued:
“Colonel Mayne from the time he arrived dominated the scene.”
That is the man he was: he was there and he had no fear.
“His cheerfulness, resolution and unsurpassed courage in this action was an inspiration to us all”.
That is an account from the soldiers who watched that colossus of a man jump out and rescue them, and win the day for the allies in their advance in Germany. Undoubtedly, it seemed a suicidal mission to rescue his comrades and ensure that the enemy retreated further, but Colonel Mayne’s mission was a complete success. In the words of Brigadier Calvert:
“Not only did he save the lives of the wounded but he also completely defeated and destroyed the enemy.”
Lieutenant Colonel Mayne’s story is the stuff of which legends are made—legends that we know to be true. When we were boys in Newtownards and Ballywalter many years ago, we looked to be that person. It is the stuff of which many of us dreamed as young boys and acted out in our gardens. Blair Mayne was certainly a hero of mine as a young child, many years ago. His actions were those of a man who put others first, and who went above and beyond the call of duty.
There is absolutely no doubt that his actions on that day were heroic, and worthy of recognition and commendation. That is why Brigadier Calvert recommended that Mayne be awarded the highest award, the Victoria Cross. Mayne was informed that he was to be granted that well-deserved accolade, and he informed his mother accordingly, which made her even more proud. Who is more proud of anyone than their mum? Mums think that whatever their children do is brilliant—my mum is the same. I hope that is true, by the way.
I have told that war story because it is a factual, historical account. The BBC’s “SAS: Rogue Heroes” dramatisation about a founding member of a covert special raiding squadron—a hero many times over, reputed to have single-handedly destroyed 130 enemy planes and commended for the highest military award—is a global success. However, six months after he was recommended for the award, a terrible mistake happened. That mistake stripped Blair Mayne of his hard-won honour and much of his self-esteem.
The award of the Victoria Cross by the 1931 royal warrant is bestowed upon those who display acts of conspicuous gallantry and for a “signal act of valour” in the presence of the enemy. Paddy Mayne had more than attained that standard, but the mistake lies with the word “signal”, defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as
“an event or statement that provides the impulse or occasion for something to happen.”
In other words, a “signal” event is not a planned event.
Mayne certainly qualified for the award, but the word “signal” was misread as “single”. It was a clerical error and we are very clearly putting forward that viewpoint. Mayne had been accompanied in the jeep by Lieutenant Scott, who provided covering fire. Therefore, Mayne had not acted single-handedly, which meant that he was deemed to be ineligible for the award. That change has been queried on a number of levels over the years, and yet it appears that that alteration resulted in Mayne being stripped of the award. Instead, he was given a third bar to his Distinguished Service Order.
I have seen the evidence that Lieutenant Colonel Blair Mayne was supposed to get the Victoria Cross. On his citation, “VC” was marked, but stroked out for the commendation. That is important evidence. A team of historians has been working hard on sourcing those documents, which I made available to the Minister this morning—although, to be fair, I think he had them beforehand, so he now has two copies. I put on the record my thanks to Damien Lewis, to Patric McGonigal, who is the grandson of one of the SAS originals, and to David Robinson among so many other local historians invested in this issue.
Brigadier Calvert recommended that Mayne should be awarded the VC for his actions in rescuing his men. He submitted signed statements from three officers who witnessed those actions: Lieutenant Scott, Lieutenant Locket and Lieutenant Surrey-Dane. Calvert referred to the difficulty of assessing the military significance of Mayne’s actions in relation to the overall thrust of the Canadian division:
“I enclose a citation for the VC for Paddy Mayne. I have gone into this thoroughly with his officers and I think it was an outstanding piece of work. One almost expects these things from Paddy. The main point is, however, as to how much it affected the battle.”
Simonds agreed with him. Major General Vokes also wrote in support of the citation; in his opinion, Mayne’s spirited leadership and dash were a most important contribution to the success of the operation. He said:
“I observed the very marked respect and regard in which he was held by his officers and men. In my opinion this officer is worthy of the highest award for gallantry and leadership.”
I am not sure whether the TV programme “SAS: Rogue Heroes” really portrayed Blair Mayne in the way that it should have—he never used bad language, for instance—but he was portrayed as a leader of men. Nobody can be in any doubt that he was a man who led his soldiers, showed leadership and gave confidence and encouragement to those around him.
The citation was signed by Brigadier Calvert, Major General Vokes, Lieutenant General Simonds, General Crerar—the commander of the 1st Canadian army—and Field Marshal Montgomery of the 21st Army Group. The documentation that I have clearly outlines that officials overseeing the matter misinterpreted the VC rules as needing a “single act of valour”, whereas they in fact need a “signal act of valour”. The difference is in that wording. We are not here to throw aspersions: we are here to outline the system and how it works and how clerical error led to this happening. That means that the denial was based on a procedural error or an error of understanding, and that wrongdoing needs to be readdressed properly. One historian has noted it was clear that “VC” had been marked out because of that clerical error.
It is important to note that I do not ask the Ministry of Defence or His Majesty’s Government to overturn the entire apple cart on “no retrospective reconsiderations”: we are simply asking for an error to be corrected in this specific and singular case. We are all aware of other posthumous VCs being granted. For instance, Private Richard Norden was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia for his bravery during the Vietnam war, specifically for his actions during the battle of Fire Support Base Coral in 1968. The basis is that an error occurred that can be corrected.
We are not the only people who cannot understand why the medal was not awarded. King George VI asked how it was that the Victoria Cross “eluded” Paddy and inquired why the award was downgraded. When the King asked Winston Churchill to explain the demerit, he is said to have been shocked and saddened by the glaring omission. Inquiries were also made by several officers who could not understand what had happened. They did not have the access that we now have to the files, which clearly show the intent and the redirection.
In short, while a “signal act of valour” was originally specified, a “single act of valour” never was. That clerical error is the reason and the thrust behind what we are asking for. By the time of world war two, the VC would be awarded
“for most conspicuous bravery or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy”.
What a man! What a hero and a courageous person, with bravery such as many will never witness. As a wee boy, that is just what I wished to be. All that was confirmed by the witnesses involved in reporting on Blair’s actions at Oldenburg. Furthermore, the VC can also be awarded posthumously. Those are the three reasons I give: the word “single”, the fact that the VC would be awarded for “conspicuous bravery”, which was never in doubt, and the fact that the Victoria Cross can be awarded posthumously.
There are no other recorded reasons why the recommendation to award a VC was not actioned. Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth’s uncle, Major General Sir Robert Laycock, was at the time a serving officer in the forces. He wrote a letter in which he stated that Blair Mayne deserved a Victoria Cross—he earned it with his bravery—and would have received one had the proper authorities known their job. I say that very respectfully; I always do that. As a consequence, Blair Mayne did not receive the greatest honour that this country can bestow. No matter how much being awarded the highest French accolade meant, being given and then stripped of his British honour haunted Mayne for the rest of his life.
The memory of Blair Mayne lives on, and not just through the BBC series. Many in my town argue that while he was rough, he would never have cursed in front of a lady, and his comrades did not fear him—instead, they revered him. His memory is cherished in the hearts of Ards people, and there is a statue of him in Newtownards town centre. His image adorns walls that once boasted murals depicting paramilitary paraphernalia. Blair Mayne’s history—his service in uniform, his bravery and his conviction—are on the walls of Newtownards, including many of its community centres. When the council decided to build a new leisure centre, it was named the Blair Mayne leisure centre, because his sporting prowess is a matter of pride to us all. When a coffee shop opened a couple of years ago in Newtownards town centre, it was called Colonel Paddy’s, because we all revere him—by the way, its coffee is excellent. I live on coffee and fried eggs. His legacy is important to the people of our wee town.
Members may be aware that rule 40.12 of the civil procedure rules explicitly permits fixing clerical mistakes in judgments or orders, or errors arising from any accidental slip or omission, as long as the intent of the original decision holds. That is really important—it is the thrust of the debate. The original decision was to allow the VC, and the law allows for slips of the pen to be corrected. Letting an error stand, as in this case, perpetuates an injustice, especially if the mistake skewed the outcome, which it has.
I am very conscious of the time limit that you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and others have asked me to conform to, so I will conclude. It is said that King George VI asked Paddy Mayne how it was that he had not received a Victoria Cross, and he answered in a manner that sums up this courageous and honourable man: “I served to my best my Lord, my King and my Queen, and none can take that honour away from me.” Today in this House, we have the chance to restore what was his. It is time that the memory of a man who lived for his colleagues and his country was restored to its full glory through the restitution of the Victoria Cross.
I was not sure if I got the chance to wind up the debate, so thank you for giving me this opportunity, Madam Deputy Speaker. First, I thank all Members for their contributions. I learned today, for instance, that Blair Mayne served in the Falklands—that was the first time I had heard that—and I look forward to sharing what the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) told us with some of the family.
I thank everyone for spending their Tuesday afternoon before recess in this Chamber to discuss awarding Blair Mayne a posthumous VC. I thank the hon. and gallant Minister for agreeing to review the matter; we are deeply indebted to him. The family back home and we in Newtownards and the constituency of Strangford, where that good son we are proud of came from, look forward to a successful conclusion of that review.
I wish every Member a very good recess. Rest yourselves —I know I will not, but that is by the way—and have a nice time, and come back here energised.
I thank the hon. Member for his inspiring Easter wind-up.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the potential merits of awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross to Blair Mayne.
(3 weeks, 3 days 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
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the 125th anniversary of the Irish Guards.
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard, and as a Parliament to take the opportunity to celebrate a significant milestone for the Irish Guards. I thank the Minister for being present on this enjoyable occasion.
Yesterday evening, in the Royal Military Chapel—the Guards’ Chapel—and in St Mark’s, Dundela, in my constituency of Belfast East, services were held to give thanks for the service and the sacrifice, for the bravery, loyalty and determined strength of the Irish Guards. Today I am privileged to offer the same opportunity to our Parliament. Yesterday, 1 April, marked 125 years since the formation of the Irish Guards. On 28 February 1900—you may remember it well, Mr Pritchard—a letter to The Times read,
“Sir,
May I venture to suggest, through you, to the authorities within whose province it may come, that now is a most opportune time to recognise the distinguished valour of our Irish soldiers who, in the Inniskilling Fusiliers, the Dublin Fusiliers and the Connaught Rangers, have shown to the world such conspicuous bravery in the many recent battles which they have fought with such brilliant dash and daring throughout our South Africa War. Is there not one mark of distinction and honour that can be conferred upon them and their country which belongs to Scotchmen and Englishmen, but is withheld from them? There are Scotch Guards and English Guards—why not add to the roll of glory a Regiment of Irish Guards?”
On 3 March 1900, a letter in response was issued from the Queen’s private secretary, Windsor Castle, in reply to the Secretary of State for War:
“My Dear Lord Lansdowne,
By a curious coincidence The Queen has during the past week been seriously considering the question of a Regiment of Irish Guards, thinking that the present was opportunity for its creation. Therefore I am glad to be able to tell you the Queen entirely approves of the ideal. Her Majesty asked the Duke of Connaught to speak to the Commander in Chief on the subject and hopes that you will therefore find that Lord Wolseley is already in procession of Her Majesty’s views.”
So was issued Army Order 77, on 1 April 1900:
“Formation of Regiment of Irish Guards:
Her Majesty The Queen, having it deemed it desirable to commemorate the bravery shown by the Irish regiments in the recent operations in South Africa, has been graciously pleased to command that Irish Regiment of Foot Guards be formed. This regiment will be designated the ‘Irish Guards’.”
Affectionately now known as the Micks, the Irish Guards were formed in solemn recognition of their antecedents’ bravery, arising from their sterling contribution to our nation. Their formation was a fitting tribute to the bravery of the Inniskilling Fusiliers, the Dublin Fusiliers and the Connaught Rangers during the Boer war. This Unionist is not only grateful, but proud, that the history and heritage of the Irish Guards predates partition and to this day draws personnel from across the island of Ireland; and this Unionist is proud that the regiment’s emblem, motto and blue plumage all draw upon and recognise our patron saint, St Patrick.
I commend my right hon. Friend for bringing this debate forward. He is immensely proud of the Irish Guards, as am I. In Newtownards, we have the second largest Irish Guards Association—after Liverpool. The reputation of the Guards from the Ards, as they are well known, is secure, with Ards and North Down borough council granting the freedom of the borough to the Irish Guards in 2022. Does he agree that we can all be proud of the reputation, service and legacy of the Irish Guards, wherever we live in this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—and those in the Republic of Ireland who served in the regiment as well?
My hon. Friend is right to mention the Guards from the Ards, just as it would be right to mention the Mini Micks—the cadets associated with the Irish Guards—and to recognise the affection for those past and present who have served the Irish Guards and our country with distinction, many of whom leave the service and go on to perform duties in support of us. With your permission, Mr Pritchard, I would like to recognise Mr Wayne Jenkins, our Deputy Principal Doorkeeper, who I believe is here this afternoon. He served his country proudly in the Irish Guards; I think it is important that we recognise his service—especially as my hon. Friend mentioned Liverpool.
Each St Patrick’s day, the regiment receives shamrock from their Colonel of the Regiment; Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales is admired and highly regarded beyond the regiment, but it was wonderful this year to see her with the regiment, enjoying a customary pint of Guinness.
One hundred and twenty-five years is an epoch. That duration of service can be marked in many ways. The regiment was formed in 1900, when the only thing flying in the skies were birds. In the century that has followed, our skies have not been the limit to man’s exploration. When the regiment was formed, mail was sent after putting parchment and quill together. Now mail is sent through the ether in bytes. During the passage of those 125 years, we have endured two world wars, a war on terror and, ongoing today, the invasion of the sovereign nation of Ukraine in our own European continent. In each of those examples, the Irish Guards served with distinction.
Forming part of the British Expeditionary Force, the Irish Guards were pivotal during the first world war in France. As a regiment, four Victoria Crosses were earned. Their gallantry was unquestioned in Ypres, as it was elsewhere. During the course of the second world war, the second battalion was raised in 1939 and a third in 1942. Efforts in Normandy, Belgium, Holland and Germany cannot be considered historically without the role of the Irish Guards.
Since then, Palestine, Suez, Cyprus, Afghanistan and Iraq have all formed part of the regiment’s illustrious history. It is hard to consider a conflict over the last century without considering the bravery and fortitude of the Irish Guards. More recently, guardsmen have been training, equipping and supporting Ukrainians in the defence of their country through Operation Interflex. Although that is their primary function, as Foot Guards of the Household Division the Irish Guards also have the illustrious privilege of ceremonial duties. At times of national pride and national sorrow, the Irish Guards have played their part with impeccable distinction.
I fondly remember being present for Trooping the Colour in 2022. It was a special year, with our nation celebrating the platinum jubilee, marking the enormity of our Queen’s 70 wholesome years of reign. The annual showcase occasion was made all the more special by its historic nature, providing a climax to wonderful jubilee celebrations held throughout our nation and the Commonwealth, and it was suitably led with the colours being trooped by the Irish Guards—an incredible honour that was accentuated some three months later, when we all realised that that Trooping the Colour was Her Majesty’s last.
All too often at times of distress, we seek the familiar and the comforting—the warming reassurance of the constant—and yet on this occasion it is right that we recognise that those who serve in the Irish Guards and our armed forces more generally often forgo the constant family life, family support and comfort of home so that we can enjoy ours. As this Parliament wrestles with the legacy of our past, I ask that it is prepared to honour and recognise the service and sacrifice of those who have gone before, to defend those who defended us, and in this week to celebrate 125 years of the Irish Guards. We honour them, we thank them and we wish them continued success. Quis separabit—who shall separate us?
I am not sure whether it is the same person, but Simon Nichols, a colour sergeant from Newtownards and one of the Guards from the Ards, trained personnel at Sandhurst—he actually trained Prince William and Prince Harry; one of them turned out well, while the other one I am not so sure about—and was instrumental in looking after the soldiers, male and female, who went through there.
Another fitting tribute. I suggest that there will be many from across the House.
The Irish Guards have served with distinction in north Africa, Italy, Normandy and Arnhem, where the Irish Guardsmen led the ground assault to relieve the besieged British paratroopers. In the post-war years, they served with distinction in Palestine and Malaya and, in my lifetime, in Northern Ireland, the Falklands—although I was very young at the time—the Gulf, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and of course Afghanistan. I had the privilege of serving under a general who had served in the Irish Guards, and I learned a huge amount from him. He is an example of the exceptional leadership of individuals and young officers who have come up and grown up through that fantastic regiment.
The regimental motto lays down a pledge of unity: who shall separate us? That is hard-hitting and poignant. After 125 years of service, that motto has stood the test of time. The Irish Guards stand strong and united with a bright future ahead of them. They will be better equipped for warfighting as they have recently gained a new role within the Army’s advanced forces, and that will further bolster NATO and, importantly, European security.
As guardsmen, the regiment has also made an immense contribution in non-combat roles. In recent years, it has been particularly focused on training, including partners in Africa, and has countered security challenges as varied as violent extremism and the illegal wildlife trade.
(3 weeks, 4 days 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
I commend the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) for his commitment to our veterans and the armed forces. It is a real pleasure to see the Minister in his place: the hon. and gallant Member is well known for his service in uniform, but also for his commitment to veterans. We thank him for that and look forward to hearing his contribution later.
The Royal British Legion in Northern Ireland may be small, given its population of 1.9 million, but the heart of the veterans and the fundraisers is massive. That is why the small membership in Northern Ireland raises more than its share of the funds raised in the United Kingdom by the British Legion. Some £40 million was raised and Northern Ireland raised £1.3 million, so in proportion to our size we give, by a large percentage, more to the British Army, the Navy and the Royal Air Force through the British Legion and through the poppy appeal than most other areas of the United Kingdom.
The Royal British Legion describes itself as being
“at the heart of a national network looking after our Armed Forces community.”
It provides recovery and rehabilitation services, and expert advice and guidance, to service personnel and their families, as well as campaigning
“to improve the lives of everyone in the Armed Forces community and make sure their voice is heard.”
I should have declared an interest: I am a member of the Royal British Legion Millisle branch, and I served in the Ulster Defence Regiment and the Royal Artillery for some 14.5 years as a part-time member. The Royal British Legion clubs in Comber, Newtownards, Ballywalter and Millisle are greatly used by society and community groups and residents associations to carry out training and host events. The legion is a place of solace and of understanding, and a place where people can be signposted to help and support.
It is essential that the Royal British Legion continues to operate in communities throughout this United Kingdom, and to do so it needs more than Government thanks: it needs support. The Royal British Legion issued in a statement in Belfast saying that it is under immense pressure to help veterans with their mental health. It cited the statistic that over the past three years the legion has seen a 44% increase in veterans presenting with complex and mental health needs. I know for a fact that that is a real and valid concern.
Although we have few world war veterans—in the Greyabbey branch that I was in, they are all away now; there was only me left, and I have transferred to the Millisle branch—we have veterans from the Falklands, the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland, after a 30-year terrorist campaign. They all deserve our thanks and our respect. More importantly, all are deserving of our support, which must begin with an enhancement of help from the Government, as we acknowledge the proven toll of service on mental health. It is no longer a taboo subject, and if we are happy to talk about it, it follows that we are happy to act on it. I know that when the Minister responds, none of us here will be found wanting. I congratulate him.
(1 month, 1 week 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
I absolutely agree. This industrial strategy is essential in making sure we have the focus to support our businesses right across the region, and in making sure that they are successful.
The upcoming defence industrial strategy must prioritise British businesses, including SMEs, ensuring that investment creates jobs and strengthens our national security. Currently, nearly 18,000 people work in defence SMEs in the west midlands, and the Ministry of Defence spends £1.6 billion annually in the region, making it the UK’s third largest defence hub. By backing UK industry, and fostering co-operation between Government, business and workers, we can build a defence sector fit for the future.
I commend the hon. Lady for bringing this issue forward, and she is certainly making a reputation for herself as an assiduous MP on these issues. I welcome what she said in relation to the Government’s commitment to 2.5% increasing to 3%—there is nobody in the United Kingdom who does not welcome that. I know that we in Northern Ireland have very strong sectors in the work we do with the Royal Navy and Thales, but does the hon. Lady agree that we must ensure that all parts of the United Kingdom can get the advantages that she has referred to, in terms of not just security, but the economy, jobs and opportunities? If we can all be part of this process going forward, that could support the Minister and the Labour Government.
I absolutely agree with the hon. Member. In fact I will go on to talk about just how important it is that all our regions and nations are embedded in this process, and that they all contribute different skills that are of value. There are so many different aspects to defence, and our defence industries that contribute and go well past into other areas of manufacturing. I thank him for raising that point.
Last week, the Business and Trade Committee heard from Rolls-Royce, BAE Systems, Leonardo and MBDA on the global combat air programme, which is an alliance between the UK, Italy and Japan, who are designing Tempest fighter jets. That alliance integrates advanced air combat technology, ensuring that our defence capabilities match evolving threats. Defence alliances are a cornerstone of trade diplomacy, driving both national security and industrial growth. They have been cited as having the potential to drive our export growth, while cementing important alliances for our defence.
One issue raised with the Business and Trade Committee was the short-term nature of defence funding cycles; even major companies operate on a one-year funding cycle, making it difficult to sustain long-term projects such as Tempest. National security priorities do not fit neatly into parliamentary terms, and our defence sector needs stability. It was suggested that moving to a three or five-year funding model would provide certainty, drive innovation and ensure that the UK remains a global leader in defence. What conversations is the Minister having on the contractual arrangements currently in play for companies and the assessment that he has made of their ability to help the Government to reach their goals for the sector and national security?
Export-led growth will be essential to the defence industries that need a wider base than just their own sovereign purchasing power. By exporting technology and products, companies will be able to keep the continuity of build programmes going away from that boom-and-bust cycle. We could use industry to foster diplomatic relations of bilateral importance. The future of the defence industry relies on a workforce equipped with the right skills and adaptable to the evolving demands of our armed forces and the Ministry of Defence.
(1 month, 1 week 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 pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) for raising this issue. He and I have very different opinions, as he knows, but we are both committed to seeing a just peace for the people of Gaza and Israel, securing the hope of a different future for every child in that area, regardless of race or religion. That is the desire that I work towards, knowing it to be the aim of this House. I will always be a proud friend of Israel and will speak from that perspective.
I must indicate that there is a time for peace through strength, which is what is needed. Israel was mercilessly attacked; the hostage releases, along with the parading of infant bodies in coffins, highlight the mentality of those who carried out the 7 October atrocities. Some 1,200 were killed—men, women and children—and women were raped with indescribable violence by Hamas terrorists. With Hamas there is clearly no remorse, but there is a clear hatred.
When people know where they stand and that the scorpion can sting, they protect themselves, which is what Israel does. Hamas can do nothing other than hate Israel and seek her eradication, and I would never support calls for Israel not to have the means to defend herself, as she rightly does.
I have lived through terrorism and the troubles and beyond. I am thankful that my children have never checked below their cars, as their dad did, or been stopped at an army checkpoint. They do not remember the days of the bombs exploding and the pain of innocent victims who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I do not advocate war; I have felt the pain of it. However, I know that nations must retain an ability to show that they can and will defend their people when peace is no longer an option.
Israel did not use its military prowess until atrocities were carried out on it. It is my hope that the time has come for a solution for Israel and the decent people of Gaza. I will support that, but I will never attempt to bring Israel to the negotiating peace table with a hand tied behind their back, while acknowledging that the hatred of Hamas has not abated, and therefore neither has the threat to Israel. I want peace, but I want a lasting peace, and that will not happen while Hamas retain any control or ability to carry out their desire. These are the same Hamas terrorists who hid behind women’s skirts in schools and hospitals—that is the sort of terrorists they are.
The rules cannot change and those who hate Israel are the main players in the game. Israel must have access to weapons and the support that they deserve. They must also have access to wise counsel to help to provide a plan and a way forward. I hope that this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland will continue to be a friend to Israel in word, wisdom and deed, as I am every day of my life and indeed will be for the foreseeable future, and for every breath that I have in this world.
I call Luke Akehurst—please keep it brief, as you have had several interventions.
(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI cannot put a piece of paper between the two of us. The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. He now has the capability to push the Government over this issue through his Select Committee. Whatever he chooses to do, I assure him that Opposition Members will support him in that pursuit.
We need to get these decisions made now, because that will put pressure on Russia. If we make the decision to seize this money, Russia will then be under pressure to reach a reasonable agreement, because the Russians do not want to lose all this money in the meantime. There is a whole line of pressure that we should be bringing to bear on the Russians.
We have allowed certain things to take place, and I do not blame just this Government, because it also happened under the last Government. The Foreign Office is always slightly reluctant to pursue sanctions with quite the aggressive nature that I would want. We recognise that. Everything has always got to be, “Well, Minister, you know, we must take into consideration a huge number of factors here, such as, ‘Why, when and who?’ These need papers, Minister.” I would say to them, “Forget the papers, let’s get to the facts.”
The fact is that we have been allowing a shadow fleet carrying liquefied natural gas to come from Russia—even in the past few months—and deliver to the UK and other countries. How can it do that? The answer is simple, and I have raised this with the Government previously. The Americans have stepped in and said that any country that takes this gas will be sanctioned, and that stopped it overnight, but we could have stopped it, because we have the major marine insurers in this country. It was British companies that were insuring this shadow fleet to take Russian gas elsewhere. In what world do people sit there, watching that, and string out questions about what they should do?
All we had to do was to say that we would sanction any marine insurer that insured one of those vessels. That would have been the end of it, because the marine insurer market is here in the UK. It would have killed that practice stone dead. America has now moved on this, and we can see some of these ships anchored off such places as India and even China, because they dare not take the gas, because of the sanctions.
I urge the Government to drive their civil servants to be quicker, faster and more determined to follow the money and to stop it. As I say, that is not a criticism alone of the present Government; it is also a criticism of the Government of my party that was in power before.
There are many things we have to address in this debate, one of which is the atrocities that the Russian forces carried out against Ukrainians where they butchered, maimed, raped, abused and burned alive. Those things cannot be forgotten about, because the families still want justice. They want those who carried those atrocities out to be accountable. As this process of peace moves forward, that justice has to be part of the peace process, as it was in Northern Ireland.
I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. That justice will take time, but part of the point that I made is that we cannot have a peace, if it is a peace without justice. Justice has to prevail, because if it does not, we encourage everyone else to think, “Whatever we do, we will get away with it next time, because they do not have the courage to pursue the justice angle of peace.” We know that, and we have known that over the past 60 or 70 years. It is what the Nuremberg trials were all about, where the idea was for the first time to pursue the aggressors. That stands in the hon. Gentleman’s case. I served in Northern Ireland, as he knows, and I lost good friends. I still wonder what happened to them, even to this day. Justice for Ukraine will take a long while, and I accept that.
The most interesting thing about the sanctions is that some of the LNG shipments were done by UK firms. I see that Shell was involved, which made it peculiar why we did not step in earlier.
I will bring my speech to a close, because I know that others wish to speak. The problem is that there is an incorrect view and assumption about the importance of defending Ukraine that has got lost in the back-and-forth row that took place over the past week and a half. The idea that just meeting Putin’s demand for territory that he may or may not have at the moment will somehow appease him and satisfy his requirements is completely wrong. I note that in the telephone call between President Trump and Putin, that is what President Trump said was important. The truth is that Putin is an ex-KGB man. Once KGB, always KGB. He is not interested in territory; he is interested in sovereignty, which is a key difference.
I commend and thank the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for setting the scene so well, and for his passion for this subject. In all the years I have known him in the Chamber—he has been here much longer than me—he has always been a stalwart, and I thank him for that. I think we all owe him a debt.
I do not much like bullies, and Putin is clearly a bully. Now that there is a bigger boy in the playground, with President Trump of the United States entering the play, Putin seems prepared to make changes and the rules are changing. Of course that is to be welcomed, but I have a real and abiding concern that memories will be deliberately short. I have a real concern that as we strive for peace—as we should—we will minimise the atrocities that the people of Ukraine have suffered over these three years, and that cannot be allowed to happen.
My mind is immediately drawn to Bucha, and while I have no desire to stir up anger and anguish, we need to ensure that we remember who and what we are dealing with, and why it is essential that our support for Ukraine is as unwavering today, during any brokerage of peace, as it was during those first few days of war. Human Rights Watch researchers who worked in Bucha between 4 and 10 April, just days after Russian forces withdrew from the area, found extensive evidence of summary executions, other unlawful killings, enforced disappearances and torture, all of which would constitute war crimes and potential crimes against humanity. Those who sanctioned this behaviour are those with whom we deal now, and this must remain in our minds. We need accountability, so that those who carried out atrocities will be made responsible for their brutality. Girls as young as eight and women as old as 80 have been raped and abused. Russian crimes against humanity must be taken to the International Criminal Court, which must make those responsible accountable in whatever way it can. If only the death penalty were still in place, I would certainly seek that for them.
In Northern Ireland we dealt with the bare face of evil for too many years. We saw hatred overcome basic humanity as mothers and children were blown to pieces in a fish shop on a Saturday afternoon by Irish republican terrorists. No cause can justify that. We saw the face of evil when people were burned alive with a napalm-like substance in the La Mon restaurant in my constituency. We saw the face of evil when people were massacred in churches. All that reminds me very much of the atrocities suffered by the people of Ukraine as I look back on the last three years. I lived through those things in my lifetime, and they remain with me.
It grieves me that that face of evil is still at work, and that such atrocities and disregard for human life—for women and children—have been replicated in Ukraine. They were replicated in Bucha as women and children were murdered. In February, the body of a Ukrainian Orthodox priest was found in the streets of Kalanchak, in Russian-occupied Kherson. According to his bishop, Russian military forces had “tortured Fr Stepan to death”. That is the Russians, and they must be held accountable for their brutality. We hear of such evil deeds being repeated throughout Ukraine. Again, my intention is not to drag up these matters in order to cease the striving for peace; I believe that peace is needed, but I also believe that accountability is needed, and that while we work for peace we cannot allow the trauma of this war to fade into insignificance. These crimes matter and those families deserve not to be forgotten.
My thoughts now, on the third anniversary of this dreadful war, are as they ever were: that we stand with Ukraine; that we must fulfil our moral duty to them in war, or indeed in peace; and that there must be no doubt that the hand of friendship of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland remains firmly extended to those families in Ukraine at this time and in all the days ahead.
(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
Thank you, Mr Speaker —I am surprised to be called so early.
No, no—I will grab the chance.
I thank the Minister for her answers. It is obvious to me and other Members of this House that she has a heart that wants to help those in Ukraine, and we appreciate that, especially since it comes from Government. I welcome the potential peace that might come, but of course it has to be a peace of justice; it has to be fair to the Ukrainians, and we hope a way can be found. Does she agree that any signs of negotiation are to be welcomed, but that there can be no doubt that Ukraine retains the support of this House? She has said that, and everyone has said it. What role will the UK have in ensuring that the people of Ukraine have security from further Russian aggression when Putin recalibrates his forces a year or two from now?
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise these concerns. It is clear that any peace that is negotiated, which must have the consent of the Ukrainians themselves, has to be durable, and to the extent that that requires security guarantees, those have to be present for it to work.
(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberFurther to the points made by right hon. and hon. Members, if we are going to have recruitment, we need to have protection. If we are to have protection, we must ensure that the disgraceful scenes—the SAS killed four IRA men who were returning from a bombing and shooting attack on a police station, trying to kill. The SAS were confronted by those killers, murderers, terrorist scum that they are, who were armed to the teeth with a machine gun that could fire 500 rounds in a minute and an AK-47. Is it not right that our soldiers should be protected? They were confronted by the enemy. That enemy was never going to surrender, and they got their just deserts.
I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we on the Government Benches share the same passion that all veterans should get the support they need. We will continue to discuss that aspect with our Northern Ireland Office colleagues, who take the lead on this matter. I encourage him to continue to raise questions, because it is important that we support all our veterans, no matter where they served across the United Kingdom. That is a matter that the Secretary of State and I, as well as the Minister for Veterans and People, will continue to discuss with colleagues across the Government.
(2 months, 4 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
My hon. Friend speaks with great weight on this topic as the Chair of the Defence Committee. In that role, it is important that he recognises the huge contribution of not only our armed forces, but the cadets, so I welcome him taking part in this debate.
I will come on to the cadet expansion scheme later in my speech, but it is really important that we think about expanding all cadet forces, not just Combined Cadet Forces, although they are important. The cadet expansion scheme is very much targeted at CCF, so I would like to see it being well funded and looking across the five cadet forces.
I commend the hon. Gentleman on bringing forward this debate. Cadet forces have featured very much in my life and in Northern Ireland. I declare an interest as a former solider for the Ulster Defence Regiment and for the Royal Artillery for some 11 and a half years. Across Northern Ireland, some 200 cadets and 50 adult volunteers, representing both the 1st and 2nd battalion Army Cadet forces, marched proudly through the streets of Ballyclare when they were first established back in October last year.
In Northern Ireland, the cadets bring both communities —the Protestants and Roman Catholics; the nationalists and the Unionists—together to serve in uniform. That is really important. We in Northern Ireland are very aware of that far-reaching goal, which they achieve. Everyone should be able to serve in the British Army, the Air Force or the Royal Navy without fear of attack from anyone. The cadet forces play their part in Northern Ireland. Does the hon. Gentleman, like me, very much welcome their reorganisation?
I really welcome that intervention, which demonstrates the role that the cadets play in every corner of the United Kingdom and shows how important it is that opportunities for young people are shared across our regions and nations.
I return to the Remembrance Sunday service in Bracknell, which I was proud to attend. There I saw young people who had given up their Sunday mornings and woken up far earlier than any teenager wants to at the weekend to do something important: to remember. In October, I visited the Bracknell Army Cadets, alongside my hon. Friend the Minister for Veterans and People and Councillor Georgia Pickering, Bracknell Forest council’s armed forces champion. I hope that the Minister will not mind my saying that he offered deep inspiration to the young people he spoke to, sharing his own personal stories of service, bravery and sacrifice in the armed forces. I hope he will also not mind my saying that I believe that the cadets, in turn, inspired him with their stories, their drive and their thoughtful questions.
In November I was privileged to visit Brackenhale school and meet its combined cadet force contingent. It was a real pleasure to see how staff, students and volunteers are rightly passionate about the impact that CCF has in creating a sense of belonging and teamwork among students, as well as supporting their wellbeing. There is an assumption that only private schools have CCFs; Brackenhale, however, is a state school. To challenge another stereotype, almost half of cadets in Berkshire are female.
It is crucial that the benefits of participation in the cadet forces should be open to all. As of April last year, almost 150,000 young people were involved in the cadets across the country, with 90,000 in the Army, Air, Sea or volunteer Cadets and 50,000 in the CCF. In the south-east, our cadet forces are supported brilliantly by the South East Reserve Forces’ and Cadets’ Association, or SERFCA. I pay tribute to its outstanding work in supporting the cadets and the community of Bracknell. Its commitment to defence is truly inspirational.
The cadets provide a range of unique opportunities for young people to gain qualifications for CV enhancement, skill acquisition and personal development. For many, membership of the cadets had been a lifeline, providing positive guidance in times of crisis. For others, it is simply a fun thing to do and an opportunity to try new experiences with friends.