Points of Order

Owen Thompson Excerpts

Monday 25th April 2022 Commons Chamber

[Owen Thompson (Midlothian) (SNP)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. On 28 March, the House considered and agreed a motion in my name:

“That this House believes that the current process for claiming War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation payments is not fit for purpose and urges the Government to launch an independent inquiry into the system’s failings.”

Following the debate, I submitted a parliamentary question to the Minister last week to seek clarity on what steps the Government are taking to establish the agreed inquiry. This morning, I received a written answer from the Minister for Defence People and Veterans that stated:

“There are no plans for an inquiry into the process for War Pensions or Armed Forces Compensation payments.”

The answer goes on to claim that the process

“remains effective, fit for purpose, and functioning satisfactorily.”

If what we heard in the debate is anything to go by, however, the Government’s definition of satisfactory is far removed from mine.

Paragraph 20.96 of “Erskine May” tells us that,

“Every question, if agreed to, becomes either an order or a resolution of the House, and is recorded as such in the Journal of the House.”

On that basis, may I seek clarity that the outcome of the debate on 28 March is indeed recorded as a resolution of the House and seek your guidance on how to see that resolution translated into action?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving me notice of his point of order. As he will know, I am not responsible for ministerial answers. Although he has said that the resolution is the opinion of the House, that was a non-binding resolution. Again, taking that a step further, I am also not responsible for how Ministers respond to non-binding motions of the House. However, the Treasury Bench and the Whips will have heard what he has to say and I am sure that they will feed back his concerns.