Oral Answers to Questions
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Curtis (Milton Keynes North) (Lab)
Kanishka Narayan (Vale of Glamorgan) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)
Economic growth is this Government’s top priority, and the Chancellor put growth right at the heart of her spending review, announcing more than £92 billion of capital investment in transport infrastructure to give people access to jobs and opportunities. This includes long-term funding for our largest city regions, billions of pounds of investment in roads, hundreds of millions of pounds for walking and cycling, and delivering transformative projects such as the trans-Pennine route upgrade and East West Rail. This will make a real difference to people’s lives up and down the country, now and in the future, showing the difference a Labour Government make.
Chris Curtis
Every French city with a population of more than 150,000 has a mass rapid transport system, yet over 30 UK cities or towns of that size still lack it. Research from Centre for Cities shows that poor connectivity holds back growth and productivity by limiting mobility. A key reason why we have so few is cost, because building a kilometre of track in the UK is twice as expensive as the European average. Can the Secretary of State set out what her Department is doing to bring down costs and help kickstart a tram-building revolution?
Heidi Alexander
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that matter with me in person a few days ago and for sending me further information on the report and the research. Trams do have the potential to support growth at much lower cost than heavy rail, but he is right that the cost per kilometre of new tramline is much more expensive in the UK than elsewhere in Europe. I have asked my officials to look into what we can do in this area as we look to unlock growth across the UK.
Kanishka Narayan
We have a proud community in St Athan in the Vale of Glamorgan that is both growing and thriving thanks to the economic opportunity provided by the Bro Tathan enterprise zone. Will the Secretary of State work with Welsh colleagues to progress funding for a new railway station in St Athan to support that growth and provide dignity for the residents?
Heidi Alexander
As we have seen in so many areas, the previous Government may have made promises about this station, but they allocated no feasibility or development funding to get the project moving. Through the spending review and infrastructure strategy, this Government will provide at least £445 million of rail enhancements over the next 10 years to deliver long-term infrastructure needs in Wales, including new stations. Details of how this funding will be allocated will be announced in due course.
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
My local economy on the Isle of Wight is entirely reliant on ferry services for the movement of people, the delivery of products and, in the case of tourism, for customers. Will the Minister acknowledge just how important unregulated ferry services are for the entire economic wellbeing of the Isle of Wight?
Heidi Alexander
I do recognise that issue. The hon. Member and his colleague on the Isle of Wight have raised this matter with me previously, and I am meeting his colleague directly after this question time to talk further. The Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), hosted a meeting recently and we are considering what further we can do as a Department to support local leaders in finding a satisfactory resolution for his constituents.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
A number of immediate airport expansions are now planned around the London area, which is fair enough, but there is some concern about the protection that is required for vital links to airports in the regions and nations of the rest of the UK. Will the Minister provide an assurance that work will be done to protect those links and the local economies that rely on them?
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Gentleman will know that we have invited Heathrow to bring forward proposals for a third runway and we are expecting further information on that this summer. We are clear that part of the expansion of Heathrow is about improving regional connectivity. He will also be aware that we have provided airports such as Doncaster with Government money to support that reopening.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
To achieve growth, businesses rely on our world-class logistics and haulage sector. Given that Logistics UK said that it was “disappointed” that the logistics sector had not been identified as one of the foundational industries in the industrial strategy this week, what happened? Did the Department for Transport go into bat for our logistics sector? Did it lose the row? Or did it not bother? What will the Secretary of State be doing to ensure that our logistics sector is seen across Government as foundational to any growth mission?
Heidi Alexander
It is my understanding that the logistics sector was pleased to be recognised as a case study in the industrial strategy. I know that it welcomed the announcement in the spending review of £590 million to progress the lower Thames crossing, which is a key strategic freight route. For many years the sector has been talking to us about improving the route from the south-east to the midlands and the north. Unlike the previous Government, this Government are finally getting on with the job. We have taken the planning decision to grant consent to the crossing and are making money available through the spending review to improve the country’s critical freight routes.
Greg Smith
The Secretary of State clearly has not listened to Logistics UK—I hope that at least she knows where the lower Thames crossing starts and ends. Let us turn to another foundational industry to transport and growth: fuel. Elizabeth de Jong, chief executive of Fuels Industry UK said about this week’s industrial strategy:
“we are disappointed not to be named explicitly as a ‘foundational industry’ today, given the vital role of the fuels sector in enabling growth”.
Why has our transport-critical fuels sector also been left behind by the Government?
Heidi Alexander
This Government’s industrial strategy sets out the sectors that have the potential to deliver economic growth and for which are competing internationally for mobile capital investment. My colleague the Minister for the Future of Roads and I meet repeatedly with the industry, be that to discuss fuels or freight and logistics. We are determined to get our economy firing on all cylinders, and we know what critical role the sectors he talks about play in that.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
My party and I were pleased when the Chancellor recently announced funding for Northern Powerhouse Rail to improve connectivity. However, we still do not know on what the money will be spent. Any plan to boost the northern powerhouse must surely include a new main line between Manchester and Liverpool—a vital link that would not only drive economic growth across the north-west but strengthen connections between two of our greatest cities. When will we finally see the detail behind the Chancellor’s announcement, and will she meet with me and my hon. Friends the Members for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) and for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) to discuss proposals for the better linking of Manchester and Liverpool?
Heidi Alexander
The mayors of Greater Manchester and Liverpool—Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram—have made a strong case for improving rail connectivity between their two great cities. The hon. Member is right to say that this Government are committed to improving the country’s rail network. I hope to say more on schemes for the north in the weeks and months ahead. I assure all hon. Members that I will come back to the House swiftly when I have more information so that they can question me further.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)
Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
The Government are kick-starting a revolution in bus services across the country, delivering the right services in the right places at the right fare levels to serve local communities. Our Bus Services (No. 2) Bill will overhaul bus service operations, protecting vital routes, including in rural and deprived areas, and delivering on our commitment to improve living standards across the country. The Government have confirmed over £1 billion of funding for buses to support and improve services in 2025-26, and we are keeping fares low by maintaining the £3 bus fare cap.
David Williams
It is no surprise that Stoke-on-Trent’s bus service improvement plan is among the best in the country. Thanks to funding from this Labour Government, dozens of new services have been delivered, such as the 36, connecting Kidsgrove to Hanley and Meir, and the 501, helping people get to Wolstanton retail park. Will the Minister join me in recognising the progress that Stoke-on-Trent has made with its bus network, and will he meet me to discuss how we can ensure that progress continues when funding ends next year?
Simon Lightwood
I congratulate Stoke-on-Trent on its success. It is great to hear that local ambitions are being realised through new bus services, lower fares and more accessible buses. Funding has been announced for 2025-26: Stoke-on-Trent city council was awarded £9.8 million, and Staffordshire county council was awarded £11 million. Future allocations for individual local authorities will be confirmed in due course.
Laura Kyrke-Smith
I am grateful to the more than 300 residents who took part in my bus survey. Many expressed frustration about Arriva’s decision to cut the X5 service, leaving schoolchildren stranded and people unable to get to work. Fortunately, on this occasion, Red Eagle Buses stepped in, but what happened speaks to the wider issue of bus companies not putting residents’ needs first. Will the Minister join me in asking Buckinghamshire council to take up the new franchising powers in the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill to fix exactly that issue?
Simon Lightwood
The Bus Services (No. 2) Bill puts the power over local bus services back in the hands of local leaders right across England, enabling them to choose the bus model that works best for their areas. The Government will support local transport authorities that decide that the franchising route is the best option for them, delivering improvements to services in their area. I hope that my hon. Friend’s local council will work with her and her constituents to find the best local solution.
Paul Davies
Reliable and accessible local bus services are vital for our communities, connecting people to work, education, healthcare and each other. Yet too often, services are reduced or withdrawn due to low usage, leaving many isolated. To ensure that those services remain viable, we must not only improve them but encourage more people to use them. What steps are the Government taking not only to improve local bus services but to commit to running national or regional campaigns to boost bus usage and protect those essential routes?
Simon Lightwood
We will encourage operators and local authorities to work together to run their own regional campaigns to help boost bus usage. Funding provided to local authorities through the local authority bus grant to improve services could be used for that kind of campaign, if those authorities feel that will help them to meet their bus service improvement plan objectives.
Chris Vince
After decades of failed bus deregulation under the Tories, I am pleased that this Labour Government truly understand the importance of delivering better bus services for millions of people. How will the Government support local leaders to take back control of their bus services, and how will that benefit my constituency of Harlow? I am thinking particularly of rural areas in my constituency, such as Roydon, Nazeing and Hatfield Broad Oak, where residents often talk about how a lack of connectivity causes issues of isolation and a lack of job prospects.
Simon Lightwood
The Bus Services (No. 2) Bill will put power over local bus services back in the hands of local leaders. It is intended to ensure that bus services reflect the needs of the communities that rely on them, including in rural areas. Leaders in places such as Harlow will be empowered to deliver reforms to their bus services. We will also be reforming bus funding, giving local leaders more control and more flexibility to deliver their local transport priorities.
Matt Turmaine
I welcome the extension of the £3 fare cap and the new powers enabling local authorities to deliver bus services that local residents need. In my constituency of Watford, the recruitment of bus engineers to keep services running remains a major problem. What are this Labour Government doing to work coherently with the sector to meet that need?
Simon Lightwood
I appreciate my hon. Friend’s concerns about the recruitment of engineers. Although it is, of course, primarily bus operators’ responsibility to ensure that they meet their staffing needs, the Government will continue to support the bus sector to meet its current and future labour requirements. The greater long-term funding certainty that the Government are providing through the spending review confirms that the bus sector is a great one for engineers to build their careers in. It was great to meet some of the rising stars in the Go-Ahead Group just yesterday.
Liz Twist
My constituents in Blaydon and Consett rely heavily on buses. Thankfully, with the support of the North East combined authority and our Mayor Kim McGuinness, my constituents have benefited from subsidised fares as a result of the Government’s continuation of the bus service improvement plan funding, for which I am very grateful. That funding is due to expire in March ’26, but it is crucial that we are able to plan how bus users across the north-east can continue to benefit from those fares. Will the Minister agree to meet me and members of the combined authority to discuss how we can continue to provide value for money for bus users in the north-east?
Simon Lightwood
I am delighted to hear that my hon. Friend’s constituents are benefiting from reduced fares, below the Government’s national £3 bus fare cap. I was pleased that we were able to allocate £23.8 million to the North East combined authority under the leadership of Mayor Kim McGuinness. I am, of course, more than happy to meet my hon. Friend.
Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)
As I mentioned to the Minister when he appeared before the Transport Committee, I sent a transport survey to every household in Weald of Kent and received hundreds of comments about our buses. Many are dismayed that villages such as Smarden, Egerton, Frittenden and Pluckley now have no bus service at all, while others observe that small villages are served by massive buses carrying one or two passengers. What further assessment has the Minister made of the role of demand-responsive services in rural areas such as mine?
Simon Lightwood
The hon. Member will be aware that the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill contains powers to ask local transport authorities to identify specific routes that are of social value and need. That will be particularly important when considering rural areas. She will also be aware that the Department has been supporting a number of design-responsive transport schemes, of which we are undertaking review.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
In my constituency, Hammersmith bridge has been closed to vehicles for over six years. During that time, buses have been unable to cross, emergency vehicles have experienced delays and businesses on both sides of the bridge have lost out. The Economic Secretary to the Treasury was recently unable to confirm on the radio whether the structures fund will be put towards the bridge’s repairs, so will the Minister tell me whether we can expect funding for Hammersmith bridge to reopen?
Simon Lightwood
I entirely appreciate the problems that the hon. Member and her constituents have experienced as a result of Hammersmith bridge. Further information on the structures fund will be announced in due course.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Several of my constituents have written to me, concerned that Arriva, which provides local bus services, has cancelled or reduced some of their local routes, such as the 322 in Maple Cross and the 328 in South Oxhey, leaving them with no other transport options aside from costly taxis. What will the Minister do to ensure that everyone has access to public transport, such as those vital bus services?
Simon Lightwood
I will expect the hon. Gentleman to walk through the Lobby with the Government when our Bus Services (No. 2) Bill comes forward. It is exactly designed to take back control of our bus services, which the Conservative party completely and spectacularly failed to do.
The Bill will empower local leaders to choose a model that works best for their area. It includes, as I mentioned, a socially necessary local services measure. Local transport authorities that operate under an enhanced partnership will be required to identify local services that they consider to be socially necessary and put in place requirements that must be followed before such services can be changed or cancelled. They also need to consider the alternative options available to them.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
Bus usage and services in rural and semi-rural areas such as Wokingham were particularly hard hit during the pandemic. Will the Minister confirm that councils such as Wokingham will not see funding for local bus services reduced, and will he recognise that rebuilding bus usage in rural areas is a unique challenge that requires extra resources?
Simon Lightwood
I completely understand the challenges, particularly in rural areas. That is why the package of measures in the Bill to give local areas the powers that they need to take control of those buses is so important. I already mentioned socially necessary bus routes. In the Budget, we confirmed £1 billion in support to improve bus services and keep fares affordable, including in rural areas. That funding has been devolved down to local leaders to decide how to spend that in any way they see fit. That will improve bus services in their area, including in rural areas.
David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
A blind resident in my constituency, Marilyn, relies on her guide dog and the local bus network to live independently. However, changes under the Government’s £1.7 million active travel grant, including floating bus stops on Rifford Road in my constituency, force her to cross fast, bidirectional cycle lanes just to board a bus. That goes against safety advice from the Guide Dogs organisation and the Royal National Institute of Blind People and is causing real distress. Does the Secretary of State agree that Government-funded infrastructure must be safe and accessible for everyone, and will she commit to reviewing active travel guidance to consider the role of floating bus stops that put blind and visually impaired people at risk?
Simon Lightwood
During the passage of the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill in the other place, we committed to writing to all local transport authorities asking them to pause the installation of a specific kind of floating bus stop, where passengers get off the bus straight into a cycle lane or an island. That is because they have been identified through research as problematic for people, particularly those with vision issues. We have already done work with Active Travel England and Transport for London to identify a design standard. Fundamentally, this Government believe in accessible transport for everyone, and that is exactly our ambition.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
If we are to deliver local bus services, we must deliver buses that are efficient and technologically modern to ensure we can meet those targets. With that in mind, will the Minister assure the House that any action taken by Government to provide buses and local bus services will support bus manufacturing across all parts of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and, in particular, Wrightbus in North Antrim?
Simon Lightwood
Absolutely, and that is why I was so proud to chair the first bus manufacturers expert panel in March. That is a year-long project with bus operators, bus manufacturers and mayors across the country to try to forge a smooth pipeline of orders to support our fantastic UK manufacturers.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
The Government know that bus franchising is commercially risky and very expensive for any local authority. We know that because Transport for London costs taxpayers £650 million a year in subsidy, and Andy Burnham’s Bee Network in Greater Manchester is currently on course for an annual deficit of £226 million, when its business plan was for a forecast profit. What is the point of giving risky franchising powers to every local authority in the country when the Government do not provide the money to support them?
Simon Lightwood
I will not take any lectures from the Conservatives under whose watch we saw 300 million fewer bus miles. As I have explained to the hon. Gentleman in Committee and in various exchanges, the full fat franchising—as it is commonly known—in Greater Manchester is only one kind of franchising available to local authorities. Various other methods are available to different areas, including the model adopted in places such as Jersey, which is a partnership between the private operators and the local transport authority so that they can benefit from its skills and knowledge.
I do not recognise—and I have corrected this in Committee—the figures that the hon. Gentleman quotes for Greater Manchester, which is performing fantastically, delivering better, more affordable, greener, smoother and reliable services for the people of Manchester.
Jerome Mayhew
I am grateful for that answer, and we have four hours of Bill Committee later today to rehearse the arguments yet again. In an earlier answer, the Minister said that he is providing £1 billion of support for buses in this financial year, but surely he knows that £700 million goes to help local authorities navigate the huge administrative burdens that come with franchising and the other schemes that the Government have in mind. That leaves just £255 million for actual bus services across the whole of England. That is only enough to satisfy Andy Burnham for a year, yet we have full fat being pursued by Liverpool and West Midlands. I ask again: where is the money to support those ambitions?
Simon Lightwood
As the hon. Gentleman is aware, places such as Greater Manchester are part of the group of authorities that have received £15.6 billion to spend in their local areas. It is important to recognise the extraordinary performance of buses in Greater Manchester. Once again, we are not telling local areas which model to adopt for buses: it could be franchising or enhanced partnerships, as well as removing the barrier to municipal bus companies.
Josh MacAlister (Whitehaven and Workington) (Lab)
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)
I am all too aware that rail performance has been sub-par for many years in this country, but following a decade of decline, we are now starting to see train performance stabilise, with passengers returning to the railway. We are working with the rail industry on a performance restoration framework, with five clear focus areas to recover performance, including timetable resilience, staffing and keeping trains safely moving during disruptive events.
Josh MacAlister
The energy coast rail line in Cumbria is in desperate need of upgrading. It has Victorian-era signalling, and parts of the track suffer from coastal erosion. Upgrading the line would be of huge benefit to passengers, improving the reliability and speed of journeys, and to critical freight for the nuclear decommissioning work and for the shipyard work at Barrow. Businesses, other Members and I will meet the Minister for Rail next week to push for funding to get the final business case over the line. Will the Secretary of State confirm that her Department will work with me and others to ensure that the project is in the Government’s infrastructure pipeline when it is published?
Heidi Alexander
My hon. Friend has been a great advocate for his constituents on this topic and makes a strong case for the scheme. My officials are working with Cumberland council and across Whitehall to refine the business case he refers to. I know the Rail Minister looks forward to meeting him next week to discuss it.
Chris Webb
In 1911, Blackpool was home to the busiest railway station in the world—a testament to our town’s rich transport heritage. Today, the Blackpool South line urgently needs a passing loop to enable trains to pass each other and deliver the reliable, frequent rail service that our community in South Shore deserves. The Government’s recent £4 million investment in Blackpool’s local bus services was welcome. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the long-overdue need for investment in the Blackpool South line to finally deliver that passing loop?
Heidi Alexander
This Government are committed to investing in local transport around the UK. I am pleased that we have been able to make such a substantial investment in bus services in my hon. Friend’s constituency. Fylde council’s business case found that there was potential to increase frequency on the south Fylde line. I know the Rail Minister would be happy to meet him to discuss the matter further.
Mr Speaker
The lead question is on Cumbria. We are putting general questions into what is a lead question, and I do not think it is good to join them up. We are now going round the country on what should have been a Cumbrian question, which is something we could think about for the future.
Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
Rail services are important in Cumbria, but they are also important in Sleaford. For some time, I have been campaigning for lifts at Sleaford railway station for those who have difficulty with stairs. I was pleased when the previous Government included Sleaford in the Access for All scheme, and having raised it at previous Transport questions, I was delighted when the Rail Minister wrote to me to confirm that the feasibility studies will go ahead. When I met Network Rail yesterday, I found that it is stuck. Network Rail has done as much as it can, but the money ready for it has not been officially unlocked. Could the Secretary of State look into that and ensure that the work goes ahead as soon as possible so that people can access the second platform even if they have trouble with stairs?
Heidi Alexander
I understand the importance of accessibility at rail stations, such as Sleaford in the hon. Lady’s constituency, and she is right that feasibility work has been done on 50 schemes across the country. That feasibility work shows that the cost of those individual schemes will vary from place to place. We are reviewing that work and looking at the overall quantum of funding we have available. I must say to her and other Members of this House that it is unlikely that we will be able to fund all 50 schemes, but I will provide an update in due course on which ones will go forward.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
Much like Cumbria, my constituents and rail users in Chichester share a part of the Brighton mainline when commuting into London. Unfortunately for them, the journey time into London Victoria—on the rare occasion when everything is running on time—is nearly 100 minutes, which is above average for cities of a similar distance from London. The complaint I hear most often about the journey is the lack of a fast service. Will the Secretary of State work with me to encourage Southern rail to implement such a service for the benefit of my constituents?
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Lady will know that these matters are constantly kept under review. We have constrained capacity on the rail network and need to balance the number of fast services we have with local stopping services, but I am happy to discuss the matter further, both with the train operating company and Network Rail.
Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)
We are unlocking growth through the power of aviation by progressing airport planning decisions and driving airspace modernisation, including through the new UK airspace design service. We have also invited proposals for a third runway at Heathrow, which will have benefits across the UK and could result in billions of pounds invested in our economy. To help the sector grow in a sustainable way, we have introduced the sustainable aviation fuel mandate and a Bill for a SAF revenue certainty mechanism.
Alison Taylor
Has the Minister had discussions with the Scottish Government on how best to use the substantial increase in the Scottish budget to support the aviation sector? In particular, what do the Government plan to do to make up for the lack of investment in connectivity around Glasgow international airport in my constituency?
Mike Kane
My hon. Friend is a champion for Glasgow airport, and as she knows, Scotland needs investment in transport and infrastructure of the kind we are now seeing across England and Wales. The Scottish Government will receive the largest real-terms settlement since devolution began in 1998 as a result of this month’s spending review. I hope this budget increase will be put to good use.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
It was good to see Doncaster regional airport recently attract £30 million from this Government. The public service obligation flight route between Newquay airport and Gatwick is a vital regional connection between Cornwall and the capital, but with the current service ending in July, it is now up for renewal. Will the Minister please meet me as a matter of urgency to ensure that this vital link remains in place?
Mike Kane
Public service obligations are vital for connecting the UK economy, and I think we currently have three. I would be more than happy to meet the hon. Member to discuss the one affecting his constituency.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I understand that this will be a deeply concerning time for workers at Alexander Dennis and their families. It is important that the Government, at all levels, support British manufacturers, which is why I was proud to chair the launch meeting of this Government’s new UK bus manufacturing expert panel on 13 March. The panel aims to explore ways to ensure that the UK remains a leader in bus manufacturing. My officials and I have been in close contact with Alexander Dennis, and I remain committed to working with it and relevant Government Departments to find a way forward.
Brian Leishman
I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, which details my membership of Unite the union.
Once upon a time, Scotland was an industrial powerhouse—we made things—but last week, Alexander Dennis started a 45-day consultation with employees. As it stands, hundreds of jobs will be lost from my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank). Unite and the GMB have called for both the Scottish Government and the UK Government, the company and the unions to come together to find a solution to save those jobs and Scottish bus manufacturing. There are changes to policy and legislation that could achieve this. My constituents, the Alexander Dennis workers, want and need to know whether the UK Government are willing to do what it takes.
Simon Lightwood
The £15.6 billion for regional transport projects over five years that we announced earlier this month will help to create a pipeline of investment for the zero emission bus market in the UK, while improving local transport for some of our largest regions. As I said, we are in close contact with all relevant parties to consider how we can support Alexander Dennis.
Euan Stainbank
I declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses. As the Minister has outlined, this Labour Government will double real-terms transport spending in city regions by the end of this Parliament. While this should be very good news for bus manufacturing in this country, Alexander Dennis—in my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman)—is, in a contradictory move, seeking to end more than a century of bus manufacturing in Scotland and put 400 workers in Falkirk out of their jobs. What actions will the Secretary of State and Ministers, in conjunction with Cabinet colleagues and the Scottish Government, take to maintain strategically necessary bus manufacturing in Falkirk?
Simon Lightwood
Labour mayors across the country are putting in orders for UK-manufactured buses, as we support bus travel in our towns and cities. The Scottish people will be asking questions about why the Mayor of Greater Manchester has managed to buy almost four times as many buses from Scotland as the SNP Scottish Government have. My officials and I are in close contact with Ministers and representatives from the Scottish Government, the Department for Business and Trade, the NFI Group—the owner of Alexander Dennis—and Scottish Enterprise to explore avenues of support.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)
Potholes and poor road surfaces are a nuisance for drivers, cause damage to vehicles and can pose a real danger to road users. To tackle the poor state of our roads following a decade of decline, this Government will provide £24 billion of capital funding over the spending review period to maintain and improve local roads and motorways across the country, delivering faster, safer and more reliable journeys.
Jim Dickson
I thank the Minister for her answer, and for reassuring residents in Swanscombe and the surrounding areas that, two years after the collapse of Galley Hill Road, hope for a solution is in sight, thanks to the structures fund announced as part of the comprehensive spending review. Can the Minister confirm the likely timescale for the structures fund being up and running and open for bids? Will she undertake to ensure that her officials in the Department are working closely with Kent county council to maximise the chances of a successful bid to the structures fund, as I am sure she will for other parts of the country?
Lilian Greenwood
I thank my hon. Friend for his steadfast advocacy for people and businesses in his constituency, which I know has been blighted by the collapse of the A226 at Galley Hill. It was visiting places such as Galley Hill that led us to invest £1 billion to enhance the road network, and create a new structures fund that will repair rundown bridges, decaying flyovers and worn-out tunnels. Details on how that fund will be allocated will be announced in due course.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
The Minister is familiar with the campaign that I and neighbouring colleagues have been running for many years to improve the A180. When will she have some good news for us?
Lilian Greenwood
I can already give the hon. Member the good news about the £24 billion allocated in the spending review for improving our nation’s roads, and as he knows, National Highways is looking closely at what can be done on the road that leads to his constituency.
Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)
Peacehaven in my constituency is a growing town, but it remains a one-road-in, one-road-out town. The daily gridlock and frequent roadworks on the A259 is the single biggest frustration and barrier to opportunity for my constituents. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can unlock that and provide a real boost to Peacehaven and neighbouring towns?
Lilian Greenwood
I appreciate how frustrating the situation is for my hon. Friend and his constituents. My officials are continuing to discuss details of the business case for the scheme with East Sussex county council, and I would of course be happy to meet him to discuss that further.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
The Rapid Transition Alliance tells us that we can improve the quality of our roads if we support more people to use rail as a form of public transport. That is one reason why I am campaigning to restore the direct train between Eastbourne and London Bridge that was discontinued during the pandemic. Will the Minister back my campaign, with a view to helping to improve our roads and improve economic growth for Eastbourne too?
Lilian Greenwood
That was a creative way of asking about railways in a question about roads. This Government are committed to improving all forms of transport, so that people have a real choice about the best mode to use for their journey. We are keen for people to have the choice of sustainable transport modes, including rail, walking and cycling, as well as driving and travelling on buses. As the hon. Member will see, the Government are investing huge amounts to support our rail industry, just as we are doing to support the state of our roads.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
Rail services in Sutton and Cheam are supported by requirements on train operators to plan services and timetables to meet current and future passenger demand, ensuring value for money for the taxpayer. Govia Thameslink Railway and South Western Railway are required to work collaboratively with the Department for Transport to develop future plans, and our Department holds them accountable for delivering for passengers.
Luke Taylor
Earlier this week I was contacted by a long-suffering commuter using Worcester Park station. She wrote:
“As a teacher my days are already demanding, often filled with pressure, high energy, and very little downtime. Sadly, commuting to and from work now feels just as stressful. Trains during peak hours are frequently so overcrowded that they feel unsafe and extremely uncomfortable. What should be a straightforward journey has become an exhausting and frustrating part of my day.”
Now that South Western Railway is under Government control, will the Minister tell my constituents when we can expect to see the service and timetable finally improve for Worcester Park station?
Simon Lightwood
Services returning to public ownership is a watershed moment for our railways and the beginning of our efforts to build Great British Railways, a new publicly owned organisation that runs our trains. We want passengers to see improvements to their services now and, starting with SWR, each operator will have to meet rigorous bespoke performance standards on things such as punctuality, cancellations and passenger experience, so that we can begin to build a world-class public service.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
Worcester Park is a station that my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) and I know well as it is on the boundary of both our constituencies, and I confirm that my constituents face the same issues of overcrowding. SWR acquired 90 high-capacity Arterio trains to address this issue back in 2019, yet six years later only a handful have entered service. The UK taxpayer is currently spending over £5 million every month on leasing the Arterio fleet, and over £0.5 million additionally every month to store the unused trains. Will the Minister confirm how many Arterio trains are now in use, whether the issues delaying roll-out have now been addressed, and whether he thinks that spending millions of pounds every month on unused trains is a good use of taxpayers’ money?
Simon Lightwood
I am aware that another two of those trains are now in operation. The new managing director is aware that this is a challenge and we are already beginning to see progress.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)
I know that many learners are still struggling to book a driving test. We are working hard to reduce driving test wait times and help more people get on the road. In April, the Secretary of State announced further measures, including doubling examiner training capacity and offering overtime pay incentives. In May, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency launched a consultation on improving car driving test booking rules, which currently has over 30,000 responses. Over 630,000 learners now have a test booked. That number will rise as the DVSA increases test availability.
Lincoln Jopp
The post-covid backlog in driving tests was trending down under the last Government. At the time of the general election, it had got to 521,000, which was still too high, but it was coming down. Since this Government took over, the number has rocketed up to 600,000, a new record high, meaning that constituents like Oliver, in my Spelthorne constituency, have had to wait six months for a driving test. The increasing delays in driving tests are putting a handbrake on growth and productivity, so whatever the Government are doing, can they do more of it and faster please?
Lilian Greenwood
We recognise that demand for driving tests has grown not just because of a covid backlog, but due to a long-term change in behaviour and demand for driving tests. I am pleased to report that the changes we have introduced, particularly on overtime pay incentives, are making a difference. The DVSA expects to deliver thousands of additional tests this month and is working to increase test availability further over the coming year, so that constituents like the hon. Gentleman’s can obtain a test as soon as possible. I understand how important this is, particularly to young people, and we do not want to curtail their life chances.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. I now have to move on to topical questions. There will be disappointment for hon. Members whose questions are next on the Order Paper, but that is because of the way questions have been grouped. We really do need to think about why we are grouping questions that are not relevant to each other.
Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)
Earlier this month, the Chancellor’s spending review made it clear that national renewal must be felt everywhere, in every place and in every journey, and that is what this Government are delivering, starting with the biggest ever regional transport investment outside London: over £15 billion towards metro extensions in Newcastle and Birmingham, mass transit in West Yorkshire, and a new bus fleet in Liverpool.
But that is not all. We are putting billions towards the trans-Pennine route upgrade, as well as East West Rail, and we are protecting the £3 bus fare cap until at least March 2027. Today, we are going further: we are proud to announce that we are improving mobile connectivity in over 50 rail tunnels, and using satellite technology to strengthen wi-fi on all mainline trains to transform rail travel for passengers.
Finally, last week I revealed our shocking HS2 inheritance. Make no mistake: we will fix that appalling mess and get the project back on track. Our plan for change is under way, with better journeys for passengers and value for money for taxpayers.
Wera Hobhouse
The transport sector generates Britain’s highest emissions. Through collaboration with France, we have the opportunity to transform the world’s busiest ferry route, across the strait of Dover between Britain and France, into the world’s first high-volume green shipping corridor. Will the Minister commit to championing this great initiative in the UK and at the upcoming COP30?
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Lady is entirely right to highlight the importance of decarbonising our maritime industry and ensuring that our ports have the grid connections to enable fleets to purchase new vessels, so that we can get carbon emissions down on the seas, as well as elsewhere in our economy. I would be very happy to talk to her further about what more we can do to champion that important work.
Gareth Bacon (Orpington) (Con)
Both Grand Central and Hull Trains have seen their passenger numbers increase dramatically since the pandemic, by more than 50% and 20% respectively. That is a significant increase compared with other operators. Why does the right hon. Lady think that might be?
Heidi Alexander
If the hon. Gentleman wants to trade statistics on the rail network, I can tell him that we have seen a massive increase in passenger numbers on TransPennine Express and LNER. In fact, last year we had a 7% overall increase in passenger journeys and passenger revenue overall went up from £10.6 billion to £11.5 billion, which is good news for the taxpayer and a clear sign that people want to come back and use our railways.
Gareth Bacon
I was not hoping to trade statistics— I was hoping that the right hon. Lady would answer the question. I will provide the answer: it is because they are open access operators. They have to compete for passengers by providing a service that passengers want at a price they are prepared to pay, and it is clearly working. Why have the Government indicated to the industry that they are not supportive of open access by stating their opposition to eight of the nine proposals submitted in February?
Heidi Alexander
I have said repeatedly at this Dispatch Box that we see a role for open access operators when they open up new markets and add value. We have to balance that against the revenue that they abstract from the public sector operator. We cannot have a situation in which we import too much congestion on to the rail network, because there is constrained and finite capacity. I am keen to see a mixed model of delivery going forward, but I need to reduce the taxpayer subsidy going into the rail network at the moment. We are supporting—
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)
My hon. Friend is a great champion for his local constituents. We have provided an extra £500 million for councils this year to end the pothole plague, and the East Midlands combined county authority will receive almost £20 million extra, taking the total to £76 million. For Nottinghamshire to unlock its full uplift, it needs to show that it is following best practice and publish a report on its highways maintenance activities by the end of this month.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
Lilian Greenwood
I am aware that at least the certainty of a decision was welcomed by the hon. Gentleman, and I appreciate that. The Department is happy to discuss any alternative plans with him and with Cornwall council. We have met before, and I am very happy to meet him again.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I am sorry to hear about the impact that that is having on Dorothy. As my hon. Friend will know, bus services are a devolved matter in Scotland. In England, we are taking action to put power over buses into the hands of local leaders through the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
Simon Lightwood
Participants in the bus fare cap are only able to increase bus fares by inflation, so if the hon. Gentleman wants to speak to me outside the Chamber, I would be happy to take that matter up for him.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)
Everyone should be able to travel with dignity and ease, which is why we launched the aviation accessibility task and finish group last year. I expect to be able to provide an update soon, when that group publishes its findings. As my hon. Friend has mentioned, the Civil Aviation Authority’s airport accessibility performance report 2024-25 demonstrates that improvements are still required in some areas.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
Devon and Torbay combined county authority will receive just £40 million between 2026 and 2030 in local transport grant funding—less than half the amount awarded to York and North Yorkshire and a fraction of the billions given to the city regions, despite Devon having the longest road network in the country. A large local operator says that just £1 million a year would make a transformational change in Devon, where rural deprivation is well hidden. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the issues facing the bus network in Devon and the Government investment that is needed?
Simon Lightwood
Our long-term bus investment will support rural areas to improve local bus services. That is on top of the £712 million we have allocated to local authorities in 2025-26.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
I met taxi drivers in Derby, at a meeting organised by the GMB, who are proud of the work they do. They want high standards across the board; what actions is the Minister taking to review taxi licensing, so that everyone can have confidence that the taxi and private hire industry is reliable, sustainable, and safe for passengers and the drivers themselves?
Heidi Alexander
I assure my hon. Friend that we are taking this issue very seriously. We are reviewing licensing authorities’ compliance with existing guidance, and we will hold those who do not follow that guidance to account. We will go further following the publication of Baroness Casey’s review, and we have committed to taking legislative action to close the loopholes in the current licensing regime to achieve higher standards of safety across the board.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
The Dawlish sea wall collapsed in 2014, causing a devastating loss to the south-west’s economy of about £1.2 billion. It was not the break in the sea wall that closed the railway for eight weeks; it was the collapse of the cliffs. Will the Minister prioritise the project to secure those cliffs, which is yet to be carried out, or will she meet me? Perhaps she could even visit Dawlish to see how important this fix is going to be.
Lilian Greenwood
I know how important that rail line is to the people of the south-west, including the hon. Member’s constituents. We are working to determine which rail enhancement projects will be taken forward following the Chancellor’s spending review statement on 11 June. More information will be made available shortly, and I am sure that my colleague, the Rail Minister, will write to the hon. Member in due course.
Antonia Bance (Tipton and Wednesbury) (Lab)
Following the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), last week the Casey review showed us yet again that private hire vehicles are a dangerous place for many children and young people. Nationally in 2023, 96% of taxi licences were issued in one local authority—Wolverhampton, one of my neighbouring local authorities—yet only 10% of the applicants lived there. What action is the Minister going to take to ensure local taxi licensing is done locally and to high standards?
Heidi Alexander
Baroness Casey has rightly brought this issue into sharp focus, and as I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), we are committed to addressing it. We will work as quickly as possible and consider all options, including out-of-area working, national standards and enforcement, in seeking the best overall outcome for passenger safety.
Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
The Minister may be aware that the outline business case for improvements to the A31 at Hickley’s Corner in Farnham will come before her in a couple of months’ time. While I understand that she cannot make any promises now, will she at least agree to look kindly on that application and meet me to discuss it?
Lilian Greenwood
I look forward to seeing that business case when it comes forward, and I will of course be happy to discuss it with the hon. Member at the appropriate time.
Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)
A new report from the all-party parliamentary group for cycling and walking warns of the growing public safety risk posed by the widespread use of unsafe, illegally modified bikes, and the fire risk caused by their cheap but powerful batteries bought from online marketplaces. What assessment has the Minister—along with his colleagues in other Departments—made of the risks posed by those fake e-bikes?
Simon Lightwood
I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for that question. I am studying the APPG’s report in detail. Illegal e-bikes are clearly dangerous and have no place on our roads. I would be happy to meet her to discuss it further.
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
My constituent Paul cycles more than 1,000 km a month all across the country, but he tells me that Cheshire’s roads are among the worst. Poor roads are dangerous for all road users, so does the Minister agree that national guidance for pothole repair policy must properly reflect the needs of cyclists alongside motorists? We must urgently improve road conditions for everyone.
Lilian Greenwood
I absolutely agree that the poor state of the roads that has been left to us after 14 years of under-investment poses a serious risk to cyclists. That is precisely why we have given that extra £500 million to councils across England, and it is precisely why we are holding them to account and asking them to follow good practice in roads maintenance.
Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)
As the Secretary of State knows, I welcome the £445 million being invested in Welsh rail over the next five years, but will she help me to secure a meeting with the Rail Minister, so that we can discuss the need to start off building the Burns stations with the Magor and Undy station in Monmouthshire?
Heidi Alexander
My hon. Friend has been a fearsome champion for this rail investment, and I am delighted that over the next 10 years we will be spending more than £445 million on rail enhancements in Wales. I will certainly help her to secure the meeting that she requests.
Business of the House
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?
The Leader of the House of Commons (Lucy Powell)
I shall. The business for the week commencing 30 June includes:
Monday 30 June—Second Reading of the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill.
Tuesday 1 July—Second Reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill.
Wednesday 2 July—Consideration of Lords message to the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill, followed by a motion to approve the draft Armed Forces Act 2006 (Continuation) Order 2025, followed by a motion to approve a statutory instrument relating to terrorism.
Thursday 3 July—Debate on a motion on financial redress for 1950s women impacted by Department for Work and Pensions maladministration of state pension age changes, followed by a general debate on mobile phone thefts. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 4 July—Private Members’ Bills.
The provisional business for the week commencing 7 July will include:
Monday 7 July—Second Reading of the Pension Schemes Bill.
Tuesday 8 July—Remaining stages of the Football Governance Bill [Lords].
Wednesday 9 July—Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill.
Thursday 10 July—Business to be determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 11 July—Private Members’ Bills.
Jesse Norman
I am afraid to say that the past week has been another horror show for the Government. This is Armed Forces Week, as the House will know. It is a time to celebrate and champion all those who serve and have served in our armed forces, and nowhere more than in my own county of Herefordshire. We must also note that, far from celebrating the armed forces, this Government deliberately opened the door last year to unfair and vexatious prosecutions of veterans who served decades ago in Northern Ireland, and they have kept that door open.
What else? The original Abortion Act was debated for more than a year, but the Government allowed no notice for public debate on the abortion amendment last week, and they gave just two hours of debate in the Chamber on the biggest change in abortion law in nearly 60 years. Whatever one thinks of the merits of the issue, that is a scandalously bad way to make legislation.
What else? Defence Ministers were left out of the loop on the US bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities, and were unable to say whether they supported this action by our closest ally. A Government Whip resigned, expressing her deep concerns over the welfare Bill, and the Government have promised to bring the Bill forward next week, as we have just heard—let us see if they do.
Talking of U-turns, the Government, having only just U-turned on the winter fuel payment, and again on grooming gangs last week, have prepared themselves for a U-turn on the two-child benefit cap less than a year since they suspended seven Labour MPs for voting against the cap.
This is just one week. Is it any wonder that the Prime Minister’s personal reputation has continued to plummet? Only yesterday, The Times of London said:
“Not quite a year has passed since his landslide general election victory and already his political stock is trading at junk status, akin to a Zimbabwean dollar or Weimar papiermark.”
Mr Speaker, you may recall from your intimate knowledge of German history that the papiermark was a monetary instrument that led to hyper-inflation and political collapse. That is coming from The Times of London.
Shall we dig a little bit further into one specific reason why the Prime Minister’s reputation might have fallen so much? Following the record pay settlements of last year, the junior doctors have announced that they are “excited” at the idea of six months of strike action. Meanwhile, hospital consultants are balloting to see if they will strike as well. Doctors received a 22% increase last year after Labour took office, and now the junior doctors are apparently demanding a further pay increase of 29%. These are eye-watering numbers and, of course, we will all end up paying if the increases are granted, but I am afraid this is exactly what we would expect from a Government who have taxed and splurged the cash since the election.
It is hardly surprising that the unions now think they have an open door to extract money from the Treasury, and the Government have actually made the situation even worse through their rolling programme of nationalisation, and by abolishing NHS England. Whatever else it may have been, NHS England acted as a firebreak on union lobbying, because it operated semi-independently of Ministers. By abolishing it, the Government have now removed one of the few means they had to face down extortionate demands for more pay and more restrictive practices.
The same is true with the railways: as each one is nationalised—including South West Railway only last week—so the obstacles to the unions’ demands are progressively being removed. The House will recall the massive pay settlements given to the rail unions last year, with no attempt to negotiate any efficiency gains. It is only a matter of time before those unions come back for more, as the doctors are doing. These are not pay bargains; they are an abject surrender. Of course, Ministers themselves do not mind—after all, 90% of them are reported to be union members. As far as I can see, the Leader of the House is an exception: she is not a union member, and all credit to her for that.
Jesse Norman
Ah, okay. I am very sorry to say that the Leader of the House has corrected me. She is, in fact, a union member and therefore fully complicit in the same problem.
The Treasury itself is now the only hold-out against union demands. Little wonder the Chancellor has looked so unhappy and out of sorts—and that was before the Deputy Prime Minister started leaking memos calling for billions of pounds a year in tax increases. The unions know the Government are vulnerable, and they have come back for more. Labour Back Benchers also know that the Government are running scared and, led by their Select Committee Chairs, they are starting to get organised. Can the Leader of the House positively and personally now confirm that the welfare Bill vote will take place next Tuesday?
Lucy Powell
May I start by wishing two Deputy Speakers a happy birthday? [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
As the right hon. Gentleman said, this is Armed Forces Week, when we thank and show our support for the men and women who serve, or who have served, in our armed forces over many years. It is nice to see the right hon. Gentleman in his place again this week, because we have missed him quite a bit recently, but I might gently suggest that if he had been here last week, he could have asked last week’s questions last week instead of asking them this week.
He asks me about the welfare Bill. As I have just announced to the House, the Second Reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill will take place next Tuesday, and the remaining stages of the Bill will take place on the Floor of the House the following week. I want to reassure colleagues that we take parliamentary scrutiny and the process of Bills extremely seriously. That is what our parliamentary democracy is all about: Bills are introduced; principles are considered at Second Reading; and the details receive robust debate and discussion, and are often amended in Committee, before we consider Third Reading. As the House would expect, the Government actively engage with parliamentary opinion throughout a Bill’s passage, as we are doing intensively with the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill.
I am sure that the whole House can agree that our welfare system needs reform. Too many people are consigned to benefits for life without support to work and to get on. During the pandemic in particular, the number of those on sickness and disability benefits rose significantly, and the previous Government did nothing to re-engage people with the labour market afterwards. One in eight young people are now not earning or learning. Many post-industrial communities have been scarred over generations by worklessness and little job creation. As constituency MPs, we have all seen the inadequate and, frankly, degrading nature of disability benefits reassessments.
Addressing these deep-seated problems is at the core of our Labour principles and what we are trying to do with our welfare reforms. I just remind colleagues that these include: the biggest permanent increase to the standard out-of-work benefit since 1980; an end to reassessments for all those with serious health conditions; creating a more holistic and professionally-led assessments process; the biggest back to work programme in a generation; the right to try work; and ending the era of consigning people as unable to work.
To be clear, it is the Conservatives’ legacy that this Government now have to sort out—their legacy of one in 10 working-age people on sickness or disability benefits; their legacy of a generation of young people with no mental health support and poor skills; their legacy of over 7 million people on NHS waiting lists; and their legacy of inaction on welfare reforms over years and years. Quite honestly, the right hon. Gentleman has a brass neck, because the Conservatives have written the book on Government chaos, have they not? There were three Prime Ministers in three years; they sent the markets into chaos, with Budgets done on the back of a fag packet—they really did write the book on that one—there was by-election after by-election for misconduct; over 40 Ministers resigned in a single day; billions were wasted on crony covid contracts; public services were left on their knees; and industrial action was sweeping the country, costing us all dear. All of that left ordinary people paying the price with higher bills, higher mortgages and longer waiting lists.
However, this is not just about welfare reform; it is also about the context in which this sits in, and that is what this Government are getting on with doing—this Government’s mission to create good, decent, well-paid jobs in every community; this Government’s mission to bring down waiting lists and deal with the deep-seated health inequalities in this country; this Government’s mission to tackle child poverty; this Government’s mission to build more affordable and social housing, giving people a bedrock in life; and this Government’s mission to revolutionise skills and opportunities for young people. That is this Labour Government, with our Labour values, getting on with the job and delivering for people.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. I am going to allow business questions to run only until 11.30 am, because of the important statement that is to follow, so I ask Members to help each other, and there will be a good example from Afzal Khan.
Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)
I know that many colleagues in the House share my frustration with the leasehold and management companies that leverage excessive and ambiguous service charges on leaseholders and tenants. In my constituency, I am facing ongoing problems with Glide Property Management, which demands unreasonably large sums from constituents without providing suitable services, and which is refusing to respond to the numerous complaints that have subsequently been submitted to it. Does the Leader of the House agree that such companies should not continue taking advantage of leaseholders and tenants, and must be held fully accountable for all complaints?
Lucy Powell
I fully share my hon. Friend’s frustrations with our leasehold system, and the charges and difficulties that many leaseholders face. He will know that we are acting quickly to implement the provisions of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, and there is more coming on that very soon, including the measures to drive up the transparency of service charges and ensure that they can be challenged more easily by leaseholders.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
I join the Leader of the House in congratulating the Deputy Speakers on their birthdays, and in celebrating our armed forces.
Earlier this year, when the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions announced the welfare reforms, her argument to this House was that they were all about getting people back into work. That argument was undermined somewhat by the timing; in the spring statement the following week, we discovered that the £5 billion saving we achieve from the welfare reforms makes up fully half of the fiscal headroom that the Chancellor is relying on. When we take a closer look at the reforms, we find that most of the savings are generated by changes to the eligibility criteria for the personal independence payment. Entitlement to PIP is given to those in work, those out of work and those unable to work. It follows that many of those who stand to lose out as a result of the reforms will not be incentivised into work, because they will already be in work, or will be unable to join the workforce any time soon. No wonder, then, that when the Bill was published last week, there was condemnation from all sides of the House. If the books need to be balanced, we need to make sure that they are not balanced on the backs of the disabled.
The Leader of the House will be well aware of all the rumours circulating around this place that the Government are preparing to make concessions on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. What is the procedure for doing that? We understand that a reasoned amendment, if one is tabled, would kill the Bill off entirely. What are the options for the Government to make concessions? Will they have to withdraw the Bill and re-present it, or is there some other mechanism by which they can make compromises with their Back Benchers before next week?
Lucy Powell
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his place. He has done a very good job of standing in for his excellent colleague, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman), with whom I also enjoy working.
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that reform to the welfare system has to be done with compassion and be carefully managed. I am sure he also agrees that the system does need reform. He is absolutely right that PIP is not an out-of-work benefit, but a benefit that helps to support disabled people with their living needs. We have to ensure that it is sustainable for the long term, and is there for those who need it most. As I have said, we are listening closely to colleagues from across the House—including, I am sure, Members from his party—who have a lot of experience of dealing with the PIP assessment process. I am sure we all recognise that for too long it has been a box-ticking, degrading process that has not been fit for purpose. That is why we have been reviewing it and listening closely to colleagues. We want to get this right for disabled people, their carers and others.
The hon. Gentleman asks about the parliamentary process. As Leader of the House, with responsibility for legislation across the piece, I struggle to think of many Government Bills brought in this Session that have not been amended during their passage. Most Bills are amended, and those amendments are usually made in Committee and on Report. I am sure that this Bill will be considered in the usual way during its parliamentary passage.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
The Leader of the House extols the virtue of parliamentary democracy, yet over half of MPs reject the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. We have spoken to our constituents and to organisations representing disabled people. They reject the Bill, because it will cause harm to disabled people. Their voices have not been heard, much though we are trying to amplify them in this place. Will the Leader of the House urge the Cabinet to withdraw the Bill, and instead allow a general debate on how we support disabled people?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend has campaigned on these issues for a long time. We have not yet voted on, or even considered, the Bill. We will have an extensive and, I am sure, thorough parliamentary process in which to do that. I ask colleagues to think about the principles of welfare reform on Second Reading, and to then really drill down into the details of the Bill as it passes through Parliament. We have engaged with the disabled community. We will continue to engage with colleagues from across the House and with stakeholders as we consider not just this Bill but the further welfare reform that is needed, which has to be, as I say, compassionate and considered, so that we have a system that is there for the long term for those who need it most.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
Following the successful seven-year experiment on estimates day debates, the Chairs of the Procedure and Liaison Committees, the hon. Members for Lancaster and Wyre (Cat Smith) and for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier), met me yesterday, and we agreed that we would bring forward proposals for changes to the Standing Orders, which I am sure the Leader of the House will look favourably on.
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, there will be a debate on Thursday 10 July in the Chamber on the attainment and engagement of boys in education, followed by a debate on children’s health. In Westminster Hall, there will be a debate on regulatory powers over billing of energy supply to businesses on Tuesday 1 July, and debates on the future of music education and on safeguarding children with allergies at school on Thursday 3 July. There will be a debate on alcohol and cancer on Tuesday 8 July, and debates on state support for victims of terrorism and on London’s contribution to the national economy on Thursday 10 July.
Tomorrow, across India, the annual Ratha Yatra festival will take place. In Ahmedabad, the Rath Yatra festival has been held since 1878, and there is a procession through the streets of the deities that Hindus worship. In Harrow, we will celebrate on Sunday, when the annual procession will take place. This year, it will be between Stanmore temple and Kenton temple—a seven-mile route, in 31° heat, taking about four hours to complete. The good news, of course, is that it is downhill this year, and not the uphill route from Kenton to Stanmore. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing all Hindus celebrating this most important festival Jai Swaminarayan, Jai Shri Krishna and, indeed, Jai Jagannath?
Lucy Powell
I thank the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee for once again highlighting to the House all the forthcoming Backbench Business debates, and look forward to receiving from him and colleagues representations on how we hold estimates day debates. I am sure we can all agree that that probably does need to be looked at.
I join the hon. Gentleman in wishing everybody who is celebrating this weekend in his constituency and beyond a happy chariot festival, as I think it is also known. I hope that he and others keep cool, wear suncream and drink lots of water on their downhill walk.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
Yesterday’s resignation of the Reform leader of Warwickshire county council and his replacement with an 18-year-old will be of real concern to my constituents. We desperately need a functioning council to fill in potholes, deliver our care services and end the crisis in education for those with special education needs and disabilities. While I am sorry to hear about Councillor Rob Howard’s health challenges and wish him and his family well, questions remain about how he came to resign after just six weeks in the job, and about the qualifications of his 18-year-old replacement. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the need for competent and effective local government that delivers for communities around the country?
Lucy Powell
I am sorry to hear of Rob Howard’s ill health. My hon. Friend raises a much broader and more important point about the Reform party in local government. Reform is committed to reducing the head- count in local government, and its councillors clearly got the memo and are acting on it; they are resigning in droves.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
The constituency of Bromsgrove and the villages is 89% green belt. Under this Labour Government, our housing target has gone up by 85%, yet nearby Birmingham has had its housing target reduced by 20%, despite there being at least 140 hectares of brownfield land in the south of the city alone. Surely the Leader of the House agrees that that does not make sense. If it does make sense to her, could she explain it to my constituents?
Lucy Powell
We make no apology for having the most ambitious house building programme in a generation. That programme is locally led; it is about local plans that bring together a strategic view of what land is available and its best use. Those decisions should be taken locally.
Michael Wheeler (Worsley and Eccles) (Lab)
My constituents regularly contact me about the need to improve dementia care. I remember the impact that dementia had on my grandparents and my family, so I sympathise profoundly with everyone impacted by it. I was therefore delighted when my constituent Joy Watson was awarded the British empire medal in the King’s birthday honours in recognition of her inspiring work as a dementia champion. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Joy on her fantastic achievement, and send the best wishes of this House to Joy and her husband Tony, and will she consider a debate in Government time on how we can enhance dementia services?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating Joy Watson, and we send our best to her and her husband Tony. Like thousands of others across the country, they live with dementia every day. We thank the carers who support those living with dementia. This Government are committed to dementia services and making sure that we have the best research and innovation on dementia. The Health Secretary will continue to keep the House updated as part of his 10-year plan.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
June is Gypsy, Roma and Traveller History Month, celebrating the colourful histories and contributions of those communities. People are drawn to Glastonbury and Somerton as a place of pilgrimage, because of its unique spiritual heritage. After the Conservative cuts, we have no sites across Somerset for our Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities. Can we have a debate in Government time on support for the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community?
Lucy Powell
As the hon. Lady is the MP for the Glastonbury festival site—or an area close to the site—may I join her in welcoming all those going to the festival this weekend, where it is likely to be very hot? She raises an important point about the Gypsy/Roma community and the need to support it where we can. This would make a really good topic for a debate.
Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)
This is Armed Forces Week, and as we celebrate the contribution of our armed forces, we must do more to support those who serve our country. Too many of our veterans return home with post-traumatic stress disorder, for which there are few treatment options. Since December 2023, the Home Office has been sitting on a response to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs report on barriers to research on schedule 1 substances, including MDMA and psilocybin, which are used in other jurisdictions such as Australia to treat PTSD. Can the Leader of the House please find out where this response is, and arrange for a debate in Government time on novel treatments for mental health conditions?
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important matter during Armed Forces Week. I am really sorry to hear that there has not been a response forthcoming. She is absolutely right to raise the issue of the mental health trauma suffered by many of our veterans, and the need to do more to support them in the community. I will make sure that a response is forthcoming.
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating my excellent local schools in Romford and Hornchurch—Ardleigh Green infant school, Dame Tipping Church of England primary school, Hornchurch high school, Parklands primary school, Squirrels Heath junior school, St Edward’s Church of England primary school, the Frances Bardsley academy for girls, and Towers infants school—for their superb Ofsted reports, both good and excellent? Will she join me in promoting, as my local schools do, more British values, more patriotism, singing the national anthem at assembly, and flying the Union Jack outside every school across our country?
Lucy Powell
I join the hon. Member in congratulating schools in his constituency on their recent Ofsted ratings. The schools in all our constituencies do an amazing job in not just educating our young people, but giving them that full life experience about how to be good citizens—and good British citizens as well. We thank them for all their work.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
In the autumn statement, the Chancellor announced the largest devolution settlement in the history of the United Kingdom. It is deeply concerning that despite the Government giving Scotland the funding that it needs to deliver vital public services, the SNP-run East Renfrewshire integration joint board has launched its second attempt to close the Mirin and Milldale day care centres, which provide essential services supporting people with learning and physical disabilities, autism, and older adults and children. Will the Leader of the House join me in condemning those savage cuts by the SNP-run integration joint board, and call on the SNP to rethink and save those services?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend makes a very strong case. She is absolutely right that, after decades of failure under the SNP Government, local people are crying out for change. We gave the Scottish Government the largest budget settlement in their history, and they have no excuse for not using it well.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
My constituents are facing a crisis endured by people across the UK: a lack of access to basic dental care. Siân Gwenllian, Member of the Senedd for Arfon, has commissioned a report that provides a compelling case for a dental school at Bangor University. While the Welsh Government have acknowledged the potential benefits of the proposal, they cite financial constraints. Given the promise of two Governments at both ends of the M4 working together, does the Leader of the House agree that time should be found to revise Wales’s financial settlement to make this vital proposal a reality?
Lucy Powell
The right hon. Lady is right to raise the issue of dental deserts, which we see across the country, not just in Wales. She will know that the previous Government did not invest in dentistry, and that has had a knock-on effect in Wales. Many colleagues have raised with me the need for more dental schools. I suggest that she clubs together with some colleagues to get a debate on that subject.
Jade Botterill (Ossett and Denby Dale) (Lab)
My constituency has recently hosted some fantastic community events. We have had the world coal carrying championship, the annual Ossett and Gawthorpe maypole procession, the Horbury craft fair, the annual Shelley French lunch, and plenty of beer festivals—not to mention the upcoming galas across the constituency over the summer. Could the Leader of the House support me in finding parliamentary time to celebrate the hard-working volunteers behind all these events, including Visit Ossett, and acknowledge their contribution to Yorkshire’s community, culture and local economy?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend gives us a great advert for all that is going on in her constituency. These sorts of events are important for attracting visitors and tourists to her constituency, Yorkshire and beyond.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
The latest data from the Environment Agency shows nearly 17,000 reports of waste crime across England in the past year, with the west midlands sadly showing the highest concentration of incidents. Waste crime costs the UK economy around £1 billion annually, and no doubt the Labour-led Birmingham bin strikes are not helping. Can we have a debate in Government time on the problem of waste crime and the need to take action to tackle both waste crime and the bin strikes, which have been going on for over 100 days?
Lucy Powell
The right hon. Lady is right that fly-tipping and waste can blight communities and are a real problem, though I must say that incidents sky-rocketed and prosecutions fell under the previous Government. That is why we are taking steps through the Crime and Policing Bill to give police and local authorities more powers to take off-road vehicles off the streets and to take tougher action on fly-tippers.
Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my support from trade unions. This week we have heard extremely disturbing news that Northumbria police have destroyed all documents relating to the miners’ strike, including on Orgreave. That is absolutely alarming. The Labour Government have pledged an inquiry or investigation into the strikes, yet the wanton destruction of that vital, critical evidence has been allowed to happen. Is this a sinister attempt to obscure justice? I am not sure that anybody is prepared to answer that question. Who gave the police permission to destroy these documents, and what is behind it? Can we have an urgent debate into how the Government can instruct all police forces and all authorities—everyone that holds any detail on the miners’ strike and Orgreave—to retain that evidence for when the Labour Government maintain their pledge and hold an inquiry into the events of 1984? Justice cannot be served if evidence is systematically and deliberately destroyed.
Lucy Powell
That sounds like a deeply worrying development in the case, and I am sure the whole House will be shocked to hear it. My hon. Friend has long campaigned for justice and answers to what happened at Orgreave, 41 years ago. He raised the issue with me last week and I will continue to raise it with Ministers on his behalf. I join him in telling anyone involved that they must retain their records, and when questions are asked, they must come forward with every bit of information they have on what happened, as they would be expected to.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
My constituents constantly tell me that Thames Water is failing in its duties and has no financial future. In spite of its failings, we are reliant on it for the most basic human needs of water and sanitation. Will the Leader of the House allow us Government time to scrutinise in detail the merits of turning Thames Water into a public benefit company?
Lucy Powell
We urgently need to restore public trust in the water sector; that is particularly true of Thames Water, whose performance has been extremely poor over many years. There are lots of concerns about it. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, we brought in the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, the first step to reforming our water system. We have commissioned a deep look at the water governance sector. Further announcements will be coming on that, hopefully before the recess.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
Sadeq Nikzad has been convicted of a horrifying sexual assault in Falkirk in October 2023. Shamefully, Mr Nikzad continues to maintain that he has done nothing wrong; during sentencing, his lawyer claimed that this was due to cultural differences. To be clear, no one from any culture or background in our community believes that his actions were anything other than disgusting and criminal. Will the Leader of the House clarify that, once it is in force, clause 48 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will ensure that those who commit such serious offences will be unable to claim refugee status in our country ever again?
Lucy Powell
Obviously, I cannot comment on specific cases, but this one sounds truly shocking. Clause 48 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will give the Home Secretary powers to refuse refugee status to those convicted of any sexual offence, even when it does not result in a prison sentence of 12 months or more. We are determined to ensure that those who commit such crimes do not get the right to stay in this country.
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)
Brilliant organisations such as citizenAID, which was co-founded by two of my former bosses, Major General Tim Hodgetts and Professor Sir Keith Porter, provide brilliant education about civil resilience and emergency preparedness. In an increasingly uncertain world, will the Leader of the House commit to Government time for a debate on that really important issue, so that we are upskilling our citizens in case of serious incidents?
Lucy Powell
I join the hon. Gentleman in thanking all those involved in citizenAID in his constituency. It sounds like a great initiative. He is absolutely right: we need more contingency provision and to train people up so they know what to do during these kinds of incidents. When they happen, we always rely on volunteers and volunteer organisations like the one he has described. This sounds like a good topic for an Adjournment debate.
Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) (Lab)
HS2 has impacted many residents across Tamworth, with businesses and farmers having been forced to sell their land. One resident has been trapped for nearly 10 years with a property that borders HS2. He is unable to sell because 50% of the land occupies what HS2 claims is safeguarding territory. Despite the involvement of three solicitors, HS2 has failed to explain that ruling. May I therefore ask for a statement to the House on when the statutory blight will be lifted on land no longer needed for HS2, so that my constituents, along with those of other hon. Members, can move on with their lives?
Lucy Powell
That case in my hon. Friend’s constituency sounds really difficult. As she will be aware, the Secretary of State recently came to the House to explain more deeply the shocking mismanagement of HS2. We are determined to get a grip of that and get delivery back under control. We are reviewing the position on HS2 phase 2 and will set out more plans shortly, including about the safeguarding of land.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
My constituent Liz was thrown out of the RAF in 1969 when a love letter from her girlfriend was discovered. Not only did she lose her career but, as she recently discovered, she has had a criminal record for 50 years. The compensation scheme for veterans has been open since December last year, but the discharge of funds for those suffering such injustice is slow: 1,000 veterans have applied, but only 44 payments have been realised. Will the Leader of the House please make time for a debate about the process, so that those who have waited for decades can finally be compensated?
Lucy Powell
We have all been shocked by these cases; I am sorry to hear about what Liz has suffered. For so many years, those who were gay were not able to be in the armed forces. That they were treated in such appalling ways, getting criminal records and losing the jobs they adored, is truly shocking. I was really pleased that we recently had a debate on these matters on the Floor of the House, but I will absolutely ensure that she and other Members are updated on the delivery of that compensation scheme and of justice for those involved.
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
This weekend, the England women’s football team play their final friendly before they defend the Euro championship trophy they won so brilliantly in 2022. I am delighted to say that Rochdale’s very own Keira Walsh will again wear the No. 4 shirt at the heart of our midfield. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking and wishing Keira and the Lionesses all the very best of luck and in thanking her proud mum and dad, Tracy and Peter, for what they did in producing such an inspiring figure for women and girls across the country?
Lucy Powell
I am sure that the whole House will join my hon. Friend and me in wishing the Lionesses well in defending their title. What joy winning the Euros four years ago brought to us all. I join him in thanking Tracy and Peter for bringing up their daughter and for all the drop-offs and pick-ups, and all the time and energy, that go into creating someone as brilliant as Keira Walsh.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I do not know if the Leader of the House is aware that if we installed just 15% of floating solar panels on the man-made reservoirs in this country, we would double the installed base of solar power without having to put a single new solar panel on agricultural land. I know what she is thinking: “If only some plucky Back Bencher had secured today’s Adjournment debate, the House could learn more.” I am happy to say that I have, so will she encourage Back Benchers from across the House to attend today’s debate to learn more about floating solar?
Lucy Powell
I am pleased to confirm that the hon. Gentleman is a very plucky Back Bencher indeed. I am sure that many will be interested in his Adjournment debate. I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say, because it sounds like a great idea.
Mark Ferguson (Gateshead Central and Whickham) (Lab)
My constituent Danielle Wiseman is desperate to pass her theory test, but she was recently told that she cannot get a theory test in Gateshead until 2026. Will the Leader of the House make time for the urgent debate needed on access to theory tests and driving tests—an issue that bedevils people in Gateshead and across the country? Also, if she will allow me, will she congratulate Danielle and her partner David on the upcoming birth of their child?
Lucy Powell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in congratulating Danielle and David on the upcoming birth of their child. It is so important, as a parent, to be able to drive around, so I am sorry to hear about the delays they are experiencing. This matter gets raised with me lots at business questions. The Government have recently taken steps to deal with the abuse of and the huge backlog in the driving test system. We are delivering around 10,000 additional driving tests, but I will ensure that the House is updated on the matter.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
In recent weeks and months, Harrogate has been gridlocked, with seemingly unco-ordinated roadworks blocking our town. It is particularly difficult for businesses when those works go on for protracted periods of times—and when they already face Labour’s jobs tax. Will the Leader of the House agree to look at a compensation scheme for businesses affected for long periods by roadworks?
Lucy Powell
Really badly delivered roadworks, which are often unco-ordinated, can be a huge blight on local businesses, town centres and others. I hear what the hon. Member is saying. These are the responsibilities of local councils and we are putting more money into making sure that roads can be put right, but I will definitely ensure that he gets a reply.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
One in four women experience mental health challenges during pregnancy or after birth; in fact, it is the most common complication of pregnancy in the UK. Last month, almost 50 hon. Members of this House pledged their support for improved maternal mental health provision at an event that I hosted with the Maternal Mental Health Alliance. Will the Leader of the House advise on further opportunities to embed better maternal mental health provision in the Government’s 10-year plan for the NHS?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is right that maternal mental health is a critical issue to the development of a child. I have long been involved in the initiative on the first 1,001 days—from conception to the age of two—with former Leader of the House Andrea Leadsom, and I will be visiting such services in my constituency tomorrow; let me get that plug in. I assure my hon. Friend that these sorts of issues will be covered in the NHS 10-year plan, which will come to this House very shortly.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
Research shows that 91% of farmers see poor mental health as the industry’s biggest hidden issue. Last year, Kelso farmer Neil Stewart very sadly took his own life. His friends and family have since raised over £80,000 for RSABI, which provides support for people working in farming. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to them and may we have a debate on mental health in farming?
Lucy Powell
I am really sorry to hear that Neil Stewart took his own life, with the impact that must have had, and is still having, on his family and friends. To hear of their extraordinary fundraising efforts for RSABI is heartwarming. Mental health and mental health support, whether in rural communities, young people and other aspects, are a priority for the Government, and more will be announced shortly in the 10-year plan.
Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)
On 5 July, Renfrewshire hosts the annual Sma’ Shot Day parade, as it celebrates the victory of weavers over their employers in the 19th century. For more than 30 years, Mr Tony Lawler, a Paisley Buddy, has led the procession, beating the Charleston drum. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Tony as he retires from the role, and does she agree that celebrating workers’ rights is a worthwhile topic for a future debate?
Lucy Powell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in wishing everybody a happy Sma’ Shot Day celebration and all that involves, and I congratulate Tony Lawler on 30 fantastic years of service to that rich history and festival. She is right: as a Labour Government, we celebrate the advancement of workers’ rights and all the history involved.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
Surfers Against Sewage has just published its 2025 water quality report, showing that more than five people a day fall ill after entering the water at UK beaches, with many requiring GP visits or hospitalisation for chest infections or serious gastro bugs. Given the serious public health consequences of sewage pollution, will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time about the health and economic impacts of untreated sewage discharges?
Lucy Powell
Water quality has been shocking in recent years, whether in our rivers, seas or lakes. It is a huge public concern and, as the hon. Gentleman rightly points out, it has a number of consequences. That is why one of the Government’s first acts was to bring in the Water (Special Measures) Bill, which is now an Act, and we will go further. We have the commission on wider water governance reform, and further details of that will come shortly.
Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)
At a time when the Government are reducing NHS waiting lists across England, they continue to rise in Scotland. Just yesterday, the SNP Government announced plans that could see investment in NHS services reduced by a shocking 12%, resulting in a significant reduction in frontline NHS staff. Does my right hon. Friend agree that people in my constituency deserve a Scottish Government focused on improving our NHS, as has been the commitment of this Government since the general election?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is right. The SNP’s record on the NHS is shocking. We have seen years of mismanagement and growing waiting lists, including eight-hour waits in accident and emergency and 100,000 Scots stuck on NHS waiting lists for more than a year, which is truly shocking. The SNP Government have had the biggest settlement they have ever had under this Government, and they now have no excuse not to sort it out.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Earlier this month Family Business UK confirmed what was obvious to many on this side of the House—but not, apparently, to Labour Members—that the Government’s changes to business property relief will cause more than 200,000 job losses and cost the economy nearly £15 billion. That includes 250 jobs in my constituency and more than £60 million lost to the local economy in West Yorkshire. Can we have an urgent debate on the catastrophic consequences that the Government’s changes to inheritance tax, through business property relief and agricultural property relief, will have on many of our family businesses from April 2026?
Lucy Powell
As someone who also represents many family businesses, I know this is an issue of concern, but we had to take difficult decisions in our Budget to ensure that we have money going into our national health service to reduce waiting lists, and into our skills sector and education, and that meant looking at those with the broadest shoulders, including inheritance tax, so that we can restore our public services to where they need to be.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Black Country Living Museum in my constituency, which was recently named the best large visitor attraction in the country by VisitEngland? The museum brings to life the Black Country’s rich heritage through the reconstruction of shops, houses and industrial areas, telling the story of this revolutionary period in our history. Will she also make time for a debate in Government time on supporting world-class visitor attractions, which contribute so much to our local and national economies?
Lucy Powell
It is wonderful news that the Black Country Living Museum won that award—it pulled a real peaky blinder. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that these kind of visitor attractions are critical to bringing people into our communities and ensuring that our high streets and town centres thrive.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Reference has already been made to Armed Forces Week. Like Members from across the House, I will be taking part in events this weekend. North-east Lincolnshire is staging the major national event, and around a quarter of a million people will descend on Cleethorpes this weekend to take part in the events. Unfortunately, due to a constituency engagement, I cannot take part in this afternoon’s debate, but I want to put on the record my thanks to Alex Baxter and the armed forces major events team in north-east Lincolnshire and, indeed, to all the volunteers across the country who put together the events that mark this occasion.
Lucy Powell
I join the hon. Member in taking the opportunity to thank Alex Baxter and all those in the hon. Member’s constituency marking Armed Forces Week. We join together, as we always do, to thank all those who have served and are serving this country.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
New figures today from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority show that the equivalent of one child in every UK classroom is born through IVF. Yet funding for IVF is a postcode lottery and there is not enough support in the workplace, as Fertility Matters At Work highlighted in Parliament yesterday. Can we have a debate in Government time on this issue, and will the Leader of the House advise on how we can address it across Government because we need cross-departmental action?
Lucy Powell
The Government recognise, and we all recognise, that access to fertility treatment is variable across the country. We are considering these issues as part of our broader plans for the NHS. I will ensure that my hon. Friend and the rest of the House are kept updated.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I wish to raise the urgent situation facing Christians in Syria, where a suicide attack on a Damascus church recently claimed the lives of at least 20 people and injured many more. The brutal assault is a devastating reminder of the threats that Christians and other religious communities continue to face in Syria, amid years of conflict and displacement. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Foreign Office gives the House an assessment of the attack and the wider security situation for religious minorities in Syria? What steps can the Foreign Secretary take with international partners to support those vulnerable communities, ensure humanitarian access and hold the perpetrators of these atrocities to account?
Lucy Powell
Once again, the hon. Gentleman raises a serious issue. We strongly condemn the horrific terrorist attack in Damascus and continue to monitor the situation closely. We do note on this occasion that the Syrian Government’s response was swift and robust, but we will of course keep monitoring it.
Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)
This week is also Small Charity Week—a chance to celebrate the work of small charities in all our constituencies. I have had the privilege of meeting many such organisations, whether that is Home-Start Hillingdon, Hillingdon women’s centre or Trinity Homeless Projects. Despite their important work, the National Council for Voluntary Organisations found that only 3% of charities are confident about their long-term financial future. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate to celebrate Small Charity Week and talk about how we can continue to support their work?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating all those small charities in his constituency. We recognise that the last few years have not been the easiest for charities. We are taking a number of steps to keep them going, including with the charitable tax reliefs and exemptions. We are also ensuring that local government, on which many charities rely, has the long-term secure funding to support them.
David Pinto-Duschinsky (Hendon) (Lab)
Under the last Government, fly-tipping skyrocketed while prosecutions fell, and places like Burnt Oak, Colindale and west Hendon in my constituency paid the price. It is fantastic to see this Labour Government acting where the previous Government failed, bringing in stiffer penalties and giving the police powers to seize and crush vans. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how we can use those powers to consign fly-tipping to the dustbin for good, and would she join me in Hendon to crush a van?
Lucy Powell
Absolutely. Fly-tipping and littering are a blight on many of our communities, which is why I am proud that this Government are finally acting by giving councils and the police the powers they need to seize and crush many of these vehicles. My hon. Friend will know that I recently took part in a vehicle-crushing exercise with my local police, and I recommend it to others.
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)
My constituent applied to have his case against his pension provider considered by the ombudsman, and he contacted me because of the delay in receiving a determination. I, in turn, wrote to the ombudsman, who advised that my constituent was in the correct place in the queue and would be allocated to an adjudicator in September 2025. My constituent made his original application in May 2020. I am sure the Leader of the House would agree that this timescale is not acceptable, so will she find time for a debate to shine a light on why such inefficiency and poor response to constituents is happening?
Lucy Powell
I am really sorry to hear about this case. My hon. Friend is right that five years is unacceptably slow. The performance of the Pensions Ombudsman has been raised with me in previous business questions, and I am happy to take this up directly for her. She is right that such delays are just not acceptable.
Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)
Last week at Bishop’s Stortford carnival, I met Katie from Blues pre-school and nursery, which is taking part in this week’s Small Charity Week. Any donations to the nursery, which will be matched by partners, will be used to upgrade its outdoor area so it can be used by the children in all weathers. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing the nursery well as it raises funds, and in encouraging my residents to visit the donation page?
Lucy Powell
Absolutely. I join my hon. Friend in hoping that the nursery raises the funds it needs to support its work.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
Last Saturday, I launched the first Bournemouth town centre citizens panel, which brings together 50 local residents and the council to co-create an action plan for our town. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking the more than 250 people who applied, and the participants for their energy and ideas to restore pride in our town? Will she also consider making time to debate how we can support more meaningful engagement on the future of our town centres and high streets?
Lucy Powell
A citizens panel in Bournemouth sounds like a fantastic initiative, bringing people together to revitalise the great town she represents.
Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)
My border terrier, Jack, always receives a very warm welcome in Stockton North, but too many pet owners are choosing to have their animals put down for fear of sky-high vet bills. I received a positive response from the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs on 8 May to my request to review the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966. Can we have Government time to debate the recommendations of the Competition and Markets Authority because, just like Jack, I am not letting this go?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend sounds like a dog with a bone. This is an important issue that is raised with many of us by our constituents. I will ensure that the Minister updates him and, if necessary, the whole House.
Emma Foody (Cramlington and Killingworth) (Lab/Co-op)
This Government have secured record investment in the NHS, which for local people across my constituency means more appointments, earlier diagnosis and access to efficient, high-quality care. After years of under-investment and increasing waiting times, can we have a debate on how these are the first steps to restoring a health service that is fit for the future and is there when people in my constituency need it?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This Government have taken swift action to bring down waiting lists, which are down by almost 200,000 in a year, with 100,000 more patients treated in that time. We are putting extra money into the NHS because reducing waiting lists is critical to our economy and the health of everybody in this country.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
On my recent visit to Greenways primary academy in Stockton Brook, pupils were busy decorating plates kindly donated by the brilliant Steelite, showing off the artistic flair for which our creative city of Stoke-on-Trent is known.
I learned during my visit that more than 70 children are now attending the school’s brilliant breakfast club, an initiative made possible by this Labour Government. Does the Leader of the House agree it is important that kids have hungry minds that are ready to learn rather than hungry bellies?
Lucy Powell
Absolutely. We are proud of the free breakfast clubs that we are introducing. We are also proud that we are extending free school meals to all those on universal credit, because it is critical to every child’s learning that they are not going hungry.
Mr Speaker
Before I call the Prime Minister to make his statement, I note that it will cover two separate substantial subjects—the G7 summit in Canada 10 days ago, and the NATO summit in The Hague this week. For that reason I will allow a degree of latitude and, unusually, I will allow hon. Members who wish to ask about both subjects to do so. I urge colleagues to keep their questions brief for the benefit of those who are still waiting to be called. I call the Prime Minister.
G7 and NATO Summits
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister (Keir Starmer)
This Labour Government are focused on delivering security for the British people—national security, economic security, and social security. On social security, I recognise that there is a consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform of our welfare system, because the British people deserve protection and dignity when they are unable to work, and support into work when they can. At the moment they are failed every single day by the broken system created by the Conservatives, which achieves neither. I know that colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I; all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I. We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness. That conversation will continue in the coming days, so that we can begin making change together on Tuesday.
Mr Speaker, with permission I will update the House on the G7 and NATO summits, where the middle east was at the forefront of our minds. For decades, it has been the stated policy of the UK and our allies that Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon. No one who cares about the security of our country, or the future of the middle east, could live with that eventuality. For decades we have worked to prevent it, and on Saturday night the US took a big step towards resolving that threat.
There is now a window for peace. We urge Iran and Israel to honour the ceasefire and seize this opportunity to stabilise the region. That is our priority—to get Iran back around the negotiating table with the US. Ultimately, that is how we will ensure a complete, verifiable, and irreversible end to Iran’s nuclear programme. We are using every diplomatic lever to support that effort, because further instability would pose grave risks to the region and beyond, taking us even further away from freeing the hostages and easing the intolerable suffering of the Palestinians. There is also an opportunity now to push for a ceasefire in Gaza, and we must seize it. I have been discussing this with other leaders, and we will keep pushing to put the region on a better path. I have also spoken to the Emir of Qatar to express our solidarity after Iran’s unacceptable attack on the Al Udeid airbase. We took the necessary action to protect British military personnel ahead of that attack, and we will continue to support all our citizens in the region.
Mr Speaker, this crisis has punctured once again the mistaken idea that domestic and foreign policy concerns are separate, and that action in one area is at the expense of the other. The truth, now more than ever, is that international problems rebound on us at home, impacting our security and our economy. Our national security strategy is clear. In this era of radical uncertainty, faced with growing conflict, state threats, illegal migration, organised crime and terrorism, the only way to respond to these issues is by being strong, both at home and on the world stage, by pursuing a foreign policy that answers directly to the concerns of working people. That is the approach I took to NATO and to the G7.
NATO is the most successful military alliance the world has ever known and the cornerstone of our defence for over 75 years. Our duty is not merely to reflect on that success; we must equip the alliance for the future. I have long argued that this is the moment for Europe to make a fundamental shift in posture. That is what the UK has done, delivering the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war and setting out a landmark shift in our defence and deterrence in the strategic defence review.
Yesterday, NATO allies stepped up as well, to meet this moment and create an alliance that is stronger, fairer and more lethal than ever. Together, we signed a new defence investment pledge of 5% of GDP by 2035, including, for the first time, wider issues of homeland security and national resilience, like protecting our cyber-security and our energy networks. This is in lockstep with our national security strategy and we are already investing in these areas. Under NATO’s new definitions, we estimate that we will reach at least 4.1% of GDP in 2027, on the way to 5% by 2035. Allies also agreed to review both the balance and the trajectory of these requirements in 2029 to coincide with the scheduled review of NATO’s capability requirements, ensuring that we keep pace with threats and technologies as they evolve.
With this historic commitment, we are continuing our proud tradition of leading in NATO, picking up the torch from Attlee and Bevin. And now, following their lead, we will seize the opportunity created by this moment to align our national security objectives and plans for economic growth in a way not seen since the 1940s, renewing industrial communities the length and breadth of our country, boosting defence production and innovation. Our investment in Britain's nuclear deterrent alone will support 30,000 high-skilled jobs.
I want to speak directly about our deterrent capability. It has kept this country safe for decades, but we recognise the grim reality today that the nuclear threat is growing. So we are renewing our existing at-sea capability and we are going further still. I can tell the House today that we will procure at least 12 F-35A fast jets, and we will make them available to bear nuclear weapons, if necessary. That marks the return of the Royal Air Force to nuclear deterrence for the first time in three decades, the biggest strengthening of our deterrence posture in a generation, keeping our country safe while also supporting 20,000 jobs.
The NATO summit sent a message of intent that will be heard around the world, but this must be joined by renewed support for Ukraine, because if we let Putin succeed there, the deterrent effect of NATO’s new plans would be fatally compromised. So I told President Zelensky at Downing Street on Monday that we will harden our resolve. We struck an agreement together to share battlefield technology, accelerating our support for Ukraine’s defence, while boosting British security and British jobs. We committed to providing hundreds more air defence missiles, paid for not by the British taxpayer, but with money from Russia’s frozen assets.
And, together with Europe, Canada and our Indo-Pacific partners, we announced that we will deliver €40 billion of military aid to Ukraine this year, matching last year’s pledge in full. There is a path to a just and lasting peace, but it will only come through flipping the pressure on to Putin. His position is weaker than he claims, so I urged all our partners, including the US, to step up the pressure now, with more sanctions and more military support to bring Russia to the table, to agree an unconditional ceasefire, leading to serious negotiations.
Let me turn to the G7 summit, where, again, my priority was to deliver in the national interest. Again, I can report some significant progress. Leaders agreed to take decisive action on illegal migration, following the UK’s lead in using hard-headed measures such as sanctions. We marked an export contract with Canada worth over £500 million, creating jobs here at home. We secured Canada’s agreement to ratify Britain’s entry to the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership—a trading bloc worth $12 trillion.
We secured President Trump’s signature to fully implement our trade deal, which will slash tariffs on British goods. His executive order will remove aerospace tariffs completely and cut tariffs on cars from the 27.5% that British car makers face now to 10% in a matter of days, saving thousands of jobs in the west midlands and around the country. I have been to Jaguar Land Rover many times now; I have looked those workers in the eye, and I know what this means to them, their families and their whole communities. That is who I am representing at summits like this—the working people of Britain.
Navigating this world requires cool heads. It defies simplistic answers and knee-jerk judgments. We do not pretend that we can fix every global problem, but we can carve a unique path through these dangerous times to secure and renew Britain in an era of global instability. That is what our plan for change is all about: putting Britain’s national interest first.
After years of economic chaos, we have delivered economic stability for the British people. After years of our armed forces being hollowed out, we are building up our military, firing up our industries, leading in NATO, supporting Ukraine and keeping Britain safe. After years of fraying alliances, we are rebuilding and shaping them to serve the British people. We have focused every ounce of our global influence to deliver for working people and to deliver in the national interest, and I commend this statement to the House.
Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)
I thank the Prime Minister for advance sight of his statement. He has evaded Prime Minister’s questions for two weeks, only to come back here to tell us what we already heard on the news. This is a weak statement from a weak Prime Minister, which can be characterised in two words: noises off.
In his statement, the Prime Minister said:
“We urge Iran and Israel to honour the ceasefire”.
He said:
“We are using every diplomatic lever to support this effort”.
What diplomatic levers? Are they the same levers he is using with his Back-Bench rebels? Is he just asking them to please play nice? Let us be honest: nobody cares what this Prime Minister thinks—why should they, when he does not even know what he thinks? Clearly no one cares what he thinks, because he was not involved. We used to be a strategic player on the global stage, advancing Britain’s interests with confidence—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. You may not wish to hear the Leader of the Opposition, but I do. It does not do anybody good in this Chamber to try to shout down somebody who is speaking.
Mrs Badenoch
Labour Members can shout as much as they like, but we all know the truth. We used to be a strategic player on the global stage, advancing Britain’s interests with confidence, and now we are on the sidelines.
Over the last few weeks, historic events unfolded in the middle east, and at every stage Britain has been out of step with the US and out of the loop with Israel. Last week, the Prime Minister came back from the G7 insisting that there was nothing President Trump said that would indicate he was about to get involved in this conflict. Days later, the US launched its attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and the Prime Minister had no idea what was going on.
The week before, Israel launched an attack on Iran, and it became apparent that the UK was not even informed about the attack in advance, despite us having been involved in previous preventive action. How is that standing up on the world stage? On Tuesday, the Foreign Secretary—a lawyer—repeatedly could not say whether the US strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities were legal. This is a Government who do not know what they are doing. Let me make the Conservative position clear: Iran has been a direct threat to the UK for years, plotting terrorism on British soil. It must not get nuclear weapons. This is a time for Europe to step up, and the UK should be leading; instead, we have an Attorney General using international law to constrain and restrict the UK while the Prime Minister hovers indecisively on the sidelines. What we need is a leader—instead, we have three lawyers.
Last week, I wrote to the Prime Minister about how this conflict has underscored the folly of the Government’s £30 billion Chagos surrender deal. The Diego Garcia base is of obvious strategic importance for conflicts in the middle east. [Interruption.] Labour Members are shaking their heads—they do not understand. It is obvious; Diego Garcia was used extensively during the war in Afghanistan, including by the United States.
At Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister said that this Chagos surrender had been
“opposed by our adversaries, Russia, China and Iran”.—[Official Report, 4 June 2025; Vol. 768, c. 302.]
Since then, it has been widely reported that China has offered massive congratulations on the deal and conveyed that it fully supports Mauritius. Will the Prime Minister now admit that he was incorrect to state on the Floor of this House that China opposes the Chagos deal, and can he confirm whether he still views China as an adversary? Under the terms of the Prime Minister’s deal, if the US were to launch an attack from the military base on Diego Garcia, we would have to inform the Chinese-allied Mauritius Government. Will he abandon the deeply flawed surrender deal? If not, when will he introduce the legislation setting out the details of the Chagos surrender, so that Parliament can consider and debate it?
We welcome the announcement that the UK will be buying F-35A fighter jets, and I am pleased that the Labour party has now moved on from its previous position of not supporting NATO and advocating against the nuclear deterrent. [Interruption.] Labour Members pretend that it never happened, but we have the receipts. Conservatives are proud of exceeding the NATO baseline of 2% of GDP spent on defence, and we led NATO in getting there. However, the Government’s aspiration to get spending on national security to 5% is just hope—the reality is that Labour does not have a plan to get to 3%. It is all smoke and mirrors, and we do not know what the Government will spend the extra 1.5% component on. Can the Prime Minister confirm whether this is money we are already spending, or whether there will be any new money? So long as this plan remains unfunded, these are just words.
Instead of using smoke and mirrors to inflate defence spending, Labour should heed our call to hit 3% by the end of this Parliament with a fully funded plan to get there. Look at the money the Government claim they are going to save through their welfare Bill—£5 billion is nowhere near the tens, if not hundreds, of billions we are going to need to find if we are to meet that defence spending target. This is the problem, Mr Speaker: it is one thing to talk about spending money on planes and infrastructure and to make announcements about reviews, but it is another to be clear about where the money will come from and how it will be spent efficiently to secure the defence of our nation. [Interruption.] Labour Members can mutter all they like; we all know that they are terrified of doing anything that is even remotely difficult.
It is crucial that there is a clear, united front in full support of Ukraine that secures peace on Ukraine’s terms. The stakes could not be higher. We need the Government to be leveraging British influence in every way they can for Ukraine, so can the Prime Minister tell us whether he pushed for clearer language in the NATO communiqué about Russia being the aggressor in this conflict? Can he update us on the UK’s current position on Ukraine’s accession to NATO, given the absence of detail in this year’s communiqué? We must ensure that our leading role continues, but that requires strong leadership and an ability to influence.
The Prime Minister may have finally returned to this House after a fortnight away, but in truth, he is all at sea—irrelevant on the world stage and impotent in the face of rising illegal immigration. Now, with 126 of his own MPs openly undermining his authority, his Government are incapable of making even the smallest changes to bring down the cost of our ever-expanding welfare bill; there is no way that they are going to be able to pay for our defence. This is a Government who are paralysed by their own legal advice, paralysed by their rebellious Back Benchers, and paralysed by the fear of being found out for having no real vision for this country.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. I say to those who were late into the Chamber, please do not stand. I call the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister
We live in more volatile times than many of us can remember, with conflicts in many parts of the world that are evolving in a very fast and dangerous way. There has never been a more important time to work with our allies and to be absolutely serious in our response. That response was unserious.
To suggest at a time like this that the Prime Minister attending the G7 summit and the NATO summit is avoiding PMQs is unserious. What happened at NATO yesterday was historic. It was very important that, at a time like, NATO showed unity and strength, with a commitment to the future, not just to the past. That took a huge amount of work with our allies over the last few days and weeks. We were centrally involved in that, crafting the final outcome, and were recognised as having done so. I am proud that we helped put that summit into the right place yesterday, and the world emerged safer as a result. That was the unanimous view of 32 allies on leaving NATO yesterday. For the Leader of the Opposition to belittle it just shows how irrelevant she and her party are becoming. They used to once be serious about these issues, and they used to be capable of cross-party consensus, but all of that is slipping away. We have led on Ukraine and secured three trade deals.
The right hon. Lady talks about the prospect of US attacks. She must have overlooked the fact that on Tuesday, when I returned from the G7, the first thing I did was go straight into a Cobra meeting to plan for all contingencies, including a possible US attack on Iran. I will tell her why I did that, although we did offer a Privy Council briefing, so she knows this. We have military personnel co-located in nearly all the bases across the middle east, and I was therefore extremely concerned immediately upon my return to take every step to ensure that I had the highest levels of assuredness that we had the preparations in place to keep our people and our assets safe, should the need arise. Far from being blindsided, we were planning through last week, we were talking to the Americans, and we were put on notice about everything they did. She simply does not understand the nature of the relationship at that level.
In relation to Diego Garcia, let me disabuse the right hon. Lady. We do not have to give Mauritius advance notice under the treaty. That is absolutely clear.
The right hon. Lady talks about defence spend. We are the party that has increased defence spend to the highest level since the cold war—2.5%. The Conservatives talked about it; we did it. She says we do not know where the money is coming from, but she was pressed on this in an interview not so long ago, and she said that
“we talked about getting to 3% by 2030 and we couldn’t make the numbers work.”
She went on:
“We need to find a way to make the numbers work”.
I was intrigued by this interview, and I thought she was about to lay it out. Then she said:
“This sort of thing requires real thinking.”
Then she said:
“Let’s start looking at what we can do…It’s about us setting up task forces”.
That is how unserious they are.
The right hon. Lady asked about the Ukraine communiqué. As she will know, had she actually studied it, the way that NATO works is an iterative process. Therefore the position on Ukraine has not changed for NATO, and it has not changed under this Government. On the contrary, we are recognised as leading on Ukraine and as the closest ally of Ukraine, working with them the whole time. That is something I am proud of. I think it is something the House is proud of, because we had been doing this on a cross-party basis, and the sooner we get back to that, rather than the unserious response of the Leader of the Opposition, the better.
Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)
In the year since the election of this Labour Government, Britain is back as a force for good on the world stage. Following the outbreak of conflict in the middle east last week, I was proud to see the Prime Minister lead calls for calm, cool heads and de-escalation. In its aftermath, we must take seriously the renewed defence commitments that the Prime Minister has made at NATO, but we must also proudly wield the soft convening and convincing power that the UK has in spades. That soft power has historically been the key to successful diplomatic efforts in Iran, securing the joint comprehensive plan of action, and in the wider middle east and around the world. Can the Prime Minister confirm what the Foreign Affairs Committee has learned from our conversations with our European allies, which is that Britain is quietly and effectively stepping up to lead the fight against Russian disinformation and cyber-warfare, and that the investment we will be putting in will be well spent?
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend for her question, and she is absolutely right. The need to de-escalate was the central focus going into the weekend and coming out of it, and I am very pleased that we have reached a ceasefire in relation to the conflict in Iran. We absolutely need that to hold.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right about the soft convening power of the United Kingdom. It is an incredible asset and, yes, I can confirm that we are working with others in relation to Russian disinformation and cyber-attacks, which, as the House knows, are a regular occurrence.
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I thank the Prime Minister for early sight of his statement. The Liberal Democrats agree that it would have been wrong to leave an empty chair in front of the Union Jack at the table for the G7 and NATO. It is astonishing, and I share his surprise, that it is now Conservative policy not to attend the G7 and NATO.
I am glad that the Prime Minister has signalled retreat on his welfare plans. I hope that he will now listen to everyone and not just his Back Benchers.
On the G7, despite the progress that he outlined, it remains extremely damaging to the world economy that the United States and Donald Trump continue their policy of protectionism. Can the Prime Minister update the House on whether he has had discussions with other G7 and, indeed, NATO colleagues about how we could persuade President Trump to resile from protectionism?
On NATO, the Prime Minister is right to say that Putin’s imperial ambitions present a once-in-a-generation threat to our security. Last week, I travelled to Estonia to meet British troops and Estonian leaders, including Prime Minister Michal. The Estonians have not forgotten the repression enforced by Russian tanks, nor the murder of four former Prime Ministers at the hands of the Kremlin. They are under no illusions about the threat posed by Putin, and we must not be either, so I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment to NATO’s new spending target.
In the face of Russia’s war machine, the British Army remains an essential guarantor of our country’s security and that of our allies. When I met our incredible troops stationed in Estonia, I was inspired by their skill and professionalism. We need to get more brilliant people like them into the military, so will the Prime Minister consider the Liberal Democrats’ proposals to move more quickly to reverse the Conservatives’ cuts to the Army, and back our new £10,000 bonus for recruits? It is vital that we take such measures, as Putin continues his barbarism in Ukraine.
Our commitment to Ukraine’s defence must be increased, not reduced. In addition to the actions that the Prime Minister outlined, can he confirm whether he has held more discussions with partners on not just using the interest from frozen Russian assets, but seizing those assets, so that we can bolster our support for Ukraine and pay for a faster increase in defence spending? The Estonians believe they have a plan to deal with all the complications that he mentions when I ask him questions about this. Is he prepared to meet me to discuss the Estonians’ ideas about how to break the backlog so that we can seize those assets?
The Prime Minister also spoke about the conflicts and crises in the middle east. He is right to push even harder for a ceasefire in Gaza. People around the world will question whether military action, rather than diplomacy, will actually make us safer in the future. We must redouble our efforts for a just peace in the region, and that must include self-determination for the Palestinian people. Will the Government finally commit to recognising a state for the Palestinians?
The Prime Minister
May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his questions? He started by asking whether I have discussed with other G7 partners the question of US tariffs. Yes, we frequently discuss trade, the economy and, frankly, the challenges that those tariffs put in place for all economies. That is the sort of co-ordination and discussion that goes on all the time, and it will continue.
On the troops in Estonia, I have visited them a number of times myself. They are incredibly brave, and they have a real sense of purpose. I can tell the right hon. Gentleman that, at NATO, the frontline states on the border with Russia were leading the charge in relation to the work that we had to do yesterday to renew and take forward the pledges that we make.
The right hon. Member asked about reversing the cuts to the Army. We will begin the work of reversing those cuts. When the Conservatives came into government, there were 100,000 in our Army; when they left, there were 70,000. I think that is what Ben Wallace meant when he said they had “hollowed out” our armed forces.
On the question of the assets, and whether they themselves can be seized rather than just using the interest, I have been discussing that with colleagues, as the right hon. Member would expect. It is complicated, as he knows. There is not one view, frankly, on this issue among colleagues and allies. I am very happy to see the proposals that he has received from Estonia, I believe, or any others, but it remains complicated. I have to say that allies are in different places on this, but we will continue to discuss it.
On a ceasefire in Gaza and recognition, I think it is very important that we have been pressing the case, particularly, in recent days, quite urgently and in close collaboration with our colleagues—the E3 of Germany, France and the UK are working very closely together at the moment—to say that this is the moment to press on from Iran to a ceasefire in Gaza, and I mean that that should happen in days, not weeks or months. I do think there is a window of opportunity here. I hope that it happens but I cannot predict that it will. I do think that all of us should do all we can to ensure that, along with a ceasefire in Iran, we push to that ceasefire in Gaza.
On the question of recognition, it has long been our party’s policy—this Government’s policy—to recognise Palestine at the right time in the process to bring about the peace, because I think that without a two-state solution there is little prospect of lasting peace in the region, and that remains our policy.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
Last week, as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I visited NATO headquarters in the UK, where I met fantastic young men and women who are learning great skills as they prepare to defend Britain abroad. However, my constituents, when they see cuts of such great amounts—for example, as proposed in the welfare Bill—may well ask why defence spending is rising. For the benefit of my constituents, could the Prime Minister simply and briefly set that out?
The Prime Minister
First, I congratulate my hon. Friend on her elevation—I have not seen her personally since then—which is very well deserved.
My hon. Friend raised a really important point. It is right that we recognise that the first duty of the Prime Minister is to keep the country safe and secure in a volatile world, and that is a duty that I take extremely seriously. We do live in a volatile world, and it is not just something that happens overseas and has no impact on us. What has happened in the Ukraine conflict has already had an impact on her constituents in relation to their energy bills, the cost of living and so much else. We can see, from the last week or two, the impact that the conflict in Iran was having on oil prices, which again has a direct impact on her constituents. So it is absolutely right and in our own interests that we take the necessary measures in relation to defence spend. I should also say that we are determined to ensure that, as we spend more on defence, that is reflected in good, well-paid jobs in the United Kingdom, including in her constituency. On all three fronts, that is the answer I give to her constituents.
Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)
The Iranian regime has long presented a threat to the United Kingdom. As the Prime Minister and I have both experienced, our security services have foiled almost 20 Iranian-backed plots here at home. The prospect of such a regime having nuclear weapons is unacceptable, so I welcome the US and Israeli action. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that we and our European allies should now trigger snapback sanctions unless Tehran admits the International Atomic Energy Agency and allows it to fully verify that all efforts to enrich enhanced uranium have ceased?
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. Member for his question and endorse what he says about our security services, which, as he knows very well, do an incredible job in the most difficult of circumstances and at great speed, and they have foiled a number of plots that would have caused widespread panic, violence and destruction.
On snapback—I thank the right hon. Member for raising this—that is a consideration that we are discussing with our allies. I do think that it has to be part of the pressure that we apply. Exactly when and how snapback is applied will obviously be a question for discussion, but he is absolutely right to say that that is the very discussion we should be having at the moment, and I thank him.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
I welcome my right hon. and learned Friend’s statement and his commitment to increase defence expenditure, but given that we are looking to improve public services—the health service, social care, education and the police—is it realistic to do that within the current tax envelope? Has the time not come for us to review how we tax wealth, as opposed to work, to ensure that those who can bear the heaviest load do so?
The Prime Minister
On defence spend, when we set out the commitment to 2.5% by 2027-28, I set out at the same time how we would fund it. We will continue to take that approach to any spending commitment we make. My hon. Friend will know that we made a commitment in our manifesto to not raise taxes on working people. We will keep to that commitment.
Sir James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)
I welcome the element of the Prime Minister’s statement where he explicitly links defence, diplomacy and domestic security. He is absolutely right to highlight that interconnection. Therefore, will he revisit the spending review, which sees 4.5% and 5% real-terms reductions in Home Office and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office budgets, to make sure that they can actually do their jobs within that interconnected system? To pay for that, will he ensure that his Chancellor removes the job-destroying taxes on employment and reduces the tax burden, which is seeing entrepreneurs and wealth creators leave the country in their droves? Will he show real leadership and ensure that his Back Benchers do not prevent his Front Benchers reducing the cost of our welfare bill so we can pay for these incredibly important governmental functions?
The Prime Minister
On Home Office responsibility for domestic security, the right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. That is why it is important that, under the new definition of NATO, resilience at home is now included, because cyber-attacks are commonplace, energy has been weaponised, and many counter-terrorism operations have to be carried out in relation to state threats. We were very careful in the spending review to ensure that there was adequate money on all those threats. I went through that myself, so I can give him that assurance. On money coming in and out of the country, he will no doubt want to celebrate that we have had record investment under this Labour Government in the past 12 months: £120 billion, including the single biggest investment of £40 billion two days ago from Amazon, which is a sign of confidence in this Government that will be measured in many jobs across the country.
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
Rochdale has been a proud home for Ukrainians ever since they were forced to flee Soviet starvation, murder and oppression in the 1930s and 1940s, so many in my constituency will warmly welcome the decision to send 350 advanced air missiles to Ukraine, built in Britain and paid for by the interest on seized Russian assets. Does the Prime Minister agree that Russia, not Ukraine, should pay the price for Putin’s barbaric war?
The Prime Minister
Yes, I do. It is very important that when we send those missiles to Ukraine, we emphasise: first, that we are supporting Ukraine, as we have done throughout; and secondly, that that is paid for not by the British taxpayer, but with the interest on Russian assets that have been frozen.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
Does the Prime Minister agree that, in the context of the threat posed by Putin, we must provide more guidance and support to Britons to prepare them for the possibility of a future conflict, and that that should involve a national resilience campaign?
The Prime Minister
I do think we need to focus on resilience. In a sense, the shift to 5% is a reflection that national resilience is becoming ever more central in our own national defence, in particular on: cyber, where there are frequent attacks from other states; energy, where we have seen from the Ukraine conflict that energy has been weaponised; and counter-terrorism, with state-backed actions in this country, many of which have been thwarted. But the hon. Lady is absolutely right that we need to do more on resilience.
Dr Zubir Ahmed (Glasgow South West) (Lab)
While the Prime Minister was in his rightful place at the NATO summit this week, I was in my constituency for the opening of the Janet Harvey hall, a £250 million installation that will turbocharge shipbuilding in this country and put it in the service of our defence sector. The Prime Minister knows Govan shipbuilding very well. Labour recognises that the defence of our country is now inextricably linked with the growth of our economy and investment in our public services, but that view is not universally shared. I therefore ask the Prime Minister to urge the SNP Government to back our defence sector as we do, for the sake of jobs and prosperity in Glasgow South West and beyond.
The Prime Minister
I urge the SNP to back our defence spend and the jobs that brings with it, but also our defence stance. As I understand its position, the SNP is against the single most effective capability we have, which is our nuclear deterrent, at a time of the greatest volatility we have seen for decades. That is simply wrong in principle, and I urge the SNP to change it.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
At the NATO summit, was the Prime Minister able to add his voice to the congratulations and thanks that the NATO Secretary-General paid to President Trump for the successful military strike on Iran’s nuclear programme?
The Prime Minister
We have long argued that Iran should not be capable of having a nuclear weapon, and what happened on Saturday night was a big step to alleviating that threat. That was the subject of many comments at the NATO summit, along with the congratulations for the ceasefire that has now been brokered and the emphasis we now need on getting Iran around the negotiating table, because if it is to be irreversible and verifiable, it is important that it is done through negotiation. That is what we are focused on.
Mark Ferguson (Gateshead Central and Whickham) (Lab)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, especially on defence. Politics is about priorities and, as I know he knows, the most important responsibility of Government is the defence of the country and its people. I echo the sensible points made by the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak)—sadly, they were not made by those on the Opposition Front Bench—and in particular his point about our intelligence services, who are the finest in the world. There are those whom we will never know and never see, but who have kept this place, our democracy and our communities safe. Will the Prime Minister assure me that, as we seek to invest more in defence, there is a particular focus on supporting our intelligence services?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes a good point. Our intelligence services do an incredible job, and I pay tribute to them. As he will know, from now on, where the intelligence services are contributing to our national defence, that will be included in our defence spend. It will not be included in the 2.5%—that is core defence, as always understood—but will be added to it, taking it to 2.6% in 2027-28.
Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)
It will not have escaped anyone’s notice that while the Prime Minister was rightly away at the G7 and NATO summits, he made tens of billions of pounds of unfunded spending commitments, yet next week he expects Members of Parliament to vote with him to remove money from disabled people who need help to go to the toilet. How can he justify making a moral argument for security abroad while removing security from disabled people at home?
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman will know, when we announced the 2.5% increase in defence spending, we made it very clear where that money was coming from, and it was not coming from welfare spend, as he very well knows. I do believe in the moral duty—and it is a moral duty—to defend our country, which means working with our NATO allies to ensure that we have the most effective deterrent. He cannot give lectures on the moral duty to protect our country while maintaining a position of casting aside the single most effective deterrent we have. That is unserious.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I recently visited a NATO air force base in Poland as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme I am taking part in with the RAF. There, I saw at first hand the importance of working closely with our NATO allies to defend our nation and keep us secure, as we witnessed the scramble to the skies to ward off Russian fighter jets. Will the Prime Minister confirm that he is prioritising the wellbeing of our armed forces personnel, both at home and abroad, so that they can continue to keep us and our allies safe?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for her question. It is, of course, Armed Forces Week. Among other things, we have given the armed forces their single biggest pay increase in many years, and made a strong commitment to other aspects, including their accommodation. It is important that we recognise and reflect what they do for our country, and that we ensure we are able to retain the brilliance of our armed forces.
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
I very much welcome NATO’s commitment to 3.5% core defence spending, and 5% on a broader definition by 2035, for all NATO member states. However, the Prime Minister and the Government have published spending figures only up until 2030. When will they publish public spending plans for 2030 to 2035? Is it not incumbent on them to show how the target of 3.5% for core defence spending will be met by the Government? Otherwise, it is just an unfunded promise.
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman will know, when we presented the strategic defence review, we had already set out the path to 2.5% and the ambition for 3%. I think it is right that all NATO allies have now agreed the 5% by 2035, subject, of course, to review in 2029 of both the trajectory and balance. The reason for that, as he will understand, is that NATO itself is reviewing its capabilities in 2029, and the reviews will therefore coincide.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Diplomacy is the best way to prevent and de-escalate risk and ensure long-term security. What discussions took place on how to escalate the focus on diplomacy in the middle east in order to resolve the situation in Gaza—clearly, the architecture is not delivering at pace—as well as on the forgotten war in Sudan?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for her question. I reassure her that we are having discussions with other leaders not just at NATO and the G7, but on a daily basis about the architecture and the path, and how we can use diplomacy to get to a ceasefire in Gaza, and to a much better place in Sudan; I thank her for raising Sudan, which is not raised often enough. We are doing that at speed, and are trying to bring as many allies with us as possible. If the Iran ceasefire holds— I hope that it will—that will create the space to say that now is the time for that ceasefire in Gaza. That is only the first step, of course, in the route first to recovery, and then to a two-state solution.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
After a worrying start, President Trump has now strengthened NATO, both by extracting promises of more money and with the positive comments he made at the end of the summit. Has the Prime Minister had a chance to assess whether that means that President Trump’s love affair with Vladimir Putin is beginning to cool?
The Prime Minister
First, I think it was really important that NATO was united in the way that it was last night, and I do not just mean the comments of President Trump—I mean having the whole 32 countries on the same page at a really important moment for NATO. The right hon. Gentleman will understand how much hard work, guile and diplomacy went into ensuring that was the outcome. I think there was a real sigh of relief around the world that this was the position. On Putin, we are urging that this is the moment to push further to get Putin to the table for an unconditional ceasefire; President Zelensky has said for many weeks that he is prepared for those talks. We discussed that as allies, and I have discussed it many times with President Trump, as the right hon. Gentleman would expect.
Alan Gemmell (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)
Would the Prime Minister care to comment on what our adversaries will think when they hear the Leader of the Opposition mistakenly say that we cannot afford our defence commitments? Does such a fatuous response keep our country safe?
The Prime Minister
No, it does not. It was frankly embarrassing to suggest that I should not have been at NATO or the G7, and I think the Leader of the Opposition’s Back Benchers recognise that. That is not the traditional position of the Conservative party, and the sooner the Conservatives get back to their former position, the better.
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
Was there any discussion about the killing zones that currently constitute the provision of humanitarian aid in Gaza?
The Prime Minister
Yes, there was. There is real concern about the intolerable position in Gaza and what we can do to alleviate it. We have repeatedly said that it is intolerable, and that the current arrangements for aid are never going to work and cannot be maintained. Urgent diplomacy is under way to alleviate that situation, and we will continue with those efforts.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
I strongly welcome the Prime Minister’s announcement on defence spending, especially during Armed Forces Week. Does he agree that this is a landmark, historic commitment, reflecting both the scale of the threats that we face and this Labour Government’s commitment to the security and defence of our country?
The Prime Minister
I agree with my hon. Friend: the commitment is landmark. It is very important, it shows the resolve of NATO, and it reflects the resolve of this Labour Government. I am pleased that we were closely involved in crafting and bringing together the agreement that was reached yesterday.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
The Democratic primary in the most cosmopolitan city in the world has demonstrated that people will no longer support hypocritical and disingenuous politicians. I am sure that the whole House agrees that Iran must not have nuclear weapons, but as a lawyer, the Prime Minister will understand that the attack on Iran by Israel and the US did not engage the Caroline principle, which allows for a pre-emptive strike. Does the Prime Minister agree with that analysis? If he does not, can he say from the Dispatch Box that he supported those attacks?
The Prime Minister
If we all agree that Iran should not have nuclear weapons, it is about time that we did something about it. What happened on Saturday night was a big step towards alleviating that threat, which is important. We now need to complete on that. The way to do that is through the talks that are now needed to get Iran back to the table, in order to make sure that the position is irreversible and can be verified, and that is what we are focused on.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s leadership in recognising the need for a strategic response. It has been 35 years since the Options for Change defence review began bringing down defence spending from 4.1% of GDP. We have spent that dividend, gambling that we would not need to defend our values, and a generation has benefited from that bet, but now we must take our chips off the table and reinvest in our security. Does the Prime Minister agree that we must level with the public about the threats that we face and the cost of under-investment in our armed forces?
The Prime Minister
Yes, I do agree. That is why we have begun the hard work of reversing the damage done under the previous Government. My hon. Friend is right about the dividend that has been enjoyed, but we must now make sure that there is a defence dividend—that higher spending in that area is reflected in good, well-paid jobs in the United Kingdom that boost our economy across all parts of our communities.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
The former Prime Minister has just welcomed the US military action against Iran at the weekend. Why cannot the Prime Minister bring himself to welcome it, too?
The Prime Minister
I have said that we need to alleviate the threat, and that we have taken a huge step towards alleviating the threat. I have discussed that with G7 and NATO colleagues, and with President Trump. Everybody was very pleased that there was such unity on it.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
The forced deportation of children is illegal under international law, yet Russia continues to steal Ukraine’s future, one child at a time. Was the issue of Ukraine’s stolen children discussed with our allies? What more is being done to return those children to their homes and families?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising the matter. She has campaigned hard on this. It is central that if there is to be a ceasefire and a lasting peace in Ukraine—and I hope that there is—it must involve the return of the children. We have discussed that many times, and will continue to do so.
Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
Since the second world war, our national security has been based broadly on three pillars: our physical defences, which the Prime Minister mentioned in his statement; the alliances that we have built, which he also mentioned; and the international rules-based order, which he did not mention. What discussion did he have at either summit about the importance of international law, and the undermining of its credibility through the inconsistent way that it has been applied in the conflicts in Ukraine and in Gaza? In particular, did he try to persuade President Trump to lift the United States sanctions on the International Criminal Court?
The Prime Minister
I have long been an advocate of the international rules-based order, and I discuss that regularly with allies. NATO itself is a rules-based framework, and an important one at that. We need to maintain these rules-based systems to make sure that they are fit for purpose. I would add that the same is true for trade and the economy.
Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)
As a member of the cross-party UK delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, I have had the opportunity to meet Ukrainian Members of Parliament, who make the powerful case for continuing support from NATO allies. It has become clear in recent months that other countries in the region—Poland and the Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia —are growing ever more nervous about their vulnerability to invasion by Russia. Can the Prime Minister comment on the UK’s efforts and dialogue with those countries at this unsettling time? Does he agree that the security of the Baltic states is important for our national security?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the Baltic states are incredibly nervous at the moment. That has been the case for the past three years or so. We engage with them regularly, and I engage with their leaders regularly. They have been brought into the coalition of the willing, and on the occasions when they cannot attend, I have a special session with them, because their concerns are of such importance to us.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
I welcome the increase to defence spending and the revised targets. Earlier this year, at the spring statement, we saw cuts to official development assistance—the overseas aid budget—to fund defence increases. The ODA budget is integral to our international security abroad, so will the Prime Minister rule out any further cuts to this budget for defence spending increases?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Member is right to emphasise the importance of overseas aid, and that was a difficult decision. I want to put it back up to 0.7%, rather than taking it down. In the meantime, I am exploring other ways that we can find funding for overseas aid, and working with other countries to that end, because I do not think that we can just wait until we are in a position to increase the funding again.
Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement today, and the leadership that he is showing on the world stage in really uncertain times, which, beyond the confines of this place, I know are genuinely welcome in my community in Hertford and Stortford. As we mark Armed Forces Week, veterans and servicemen in my constituency will welcome the Government’s commitment to strengthening our national security, so for the benefit of my constituents, can the Prime Minister set out a little more how we are supporting our armed forces to keep us safe and honouring the service of veterans across the country?
The Prime Minister
Let me first pay tribute to the veterans in my hon. Friend’s constituency and across the country. We have already put in place a number of initiatives, particularly in relation to homelessness and veterans, and more broadly in relation to accommodation and the support for not just veterans, but our armed service personnel. That is vital not only as a reflection of their contribution, but to ensure that we deal with the retention crisis among those serving, which was caused by the Conservative party.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Although we may disagree on the detail, I agree with the Prime Minister that, as far as possible in this place, it would be better to keep partisan politics out of national security issues. Who knows, I may get the Whip withdrawn for saying that, but so be it. There are things that go beyond party politics. I thank the Prime Minister for all his hard work in the national security interests of this country.
On the G7, the Prime Minister mentioned sanctions. In his statement, he said that he urged the United States to do more on sanctions. Is he aware that the United States is actually urging the United Kingdom to do more on sanctions when it comes to Russia? Can the Magnitsky legislation be widened and deepened, so that it captures more Russian assets, and possibly other countries that may have sanctions imposed on them soon—for example, Georgia?
The joint expeditionary force was mentioned at the NATO summit. The Prime Minister will know, having attended the Norway meeting some weeks ago, that Ukraine is a JEF partnership nation. Does the UK support Ukraine becoming a full member of the joint expeditionary force? If so, when might that happen?
The Prime Minister
I thank the right hon. Member for his questions; they are all good ones, so I will endeavour to answer each part of them. Sanctions are being discussed intensely, as he will understand, and there are two elements. The first is the immediate application of sanctions in relation to Russia. We are attempting to ensure that we all act together—the US, the UK and the EU. That is the focus of our discussions and what we are urging on the US. The right hon. Member will know that there is a piece of legislation in the US that is ready to go; that needs to be co-ordinated with what we are doing. In the longer term, we need to look always at whether there is more we can do within the framework on sanctions, and we can discuss that in this House.
The right hon. Member raises an important point about Ukraine and the JEF. We have been a leading advocate of Ukraine having a role in the JEF. Ukraine already has an enhanced partnership with the JEF—the first of its kind. That was done the last JEF meeting that we had in Norway a few months ago, where we were one of the leading nations pushing for that greater involvement. We will see over time whether that partnership can be taken further, either with the JEF or NATO, but it was an important first step—not only a reflection for Ukraine but also a message to Russia.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership in representing us around the world in the last two weeks—exactly where he should be. Does the Prime Minister want to remind the Conservatives that it was a Labour Government who last spent 2.5% of GDP on defence, and can he set out how increasing our defence spending will keep our country safe and support high-quality manufacturing jobs in West Bromwich and the whole nation?
The Prime Minister
I am happy to remind the House that we had 2.5% of GDP on defence spending under the last Labour Government, and we will have it under this Labour Government. In 14 long years, the Conservatives did not do that.
Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)
I welcome the increase in defence spending. Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to explain where the money is coming from, particularly as his Government continue to weaken our economy and when another expensive benefit U-turn—on top of the winter fuel U-turn—is on its way?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady must have missed the record investment in our country in the last 12 months of £120 billion, the four interest rate cuts, and the fastest growth in the G7 in the first quarter of this year. Every time we have increased defence spending, as we did with the 2.5%, we have at the same time set out where the money is coming from.
Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)
I found the Leader of the Opposition incredibly disappointing, so goodness knows what those on her own Benches think. While she is talking Britain down, may I commend the Prime Minister for the leadership he has shown this week? Could he say a little more about how businesses in the defence supply chain, particularly in the Teesside defence and innovation cluster, can contribute to the national mission for defence and security?
The Prime Minister
There are two or three principles here. First, we need to see the increase to our defence spend reflected in good, well-paid jobs in constituencies across the country. Secondly, the big sectors in defence will obviously benefit, but we have also put together a hub for smaller supply chain businesses—which, whether defence-specific or not, are in pretty well every constituency —to ensure that they take advantage of the contracts and extra spending on defence. In that way, we can ensure that there is a dividend back in the United Kingdom from the extra spend we are putting in place.
David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
There has been some recent confusion from Defence Ministers surrounding the purchase of 12 F-35A nuclear-capable fast jets. Can the Prime Minister please inform the House of the proposed in-service date for this important capability?
The Prime Minister
We made the commitment to that capability, and we are now talking to allies about precisely what the timetable will be; I will update the House. The important thing is that the commitment is there. It is a commitment to the NATO initiative, and it brings us within that initiative. Therefore, there are a lot of moving parts, but we have made a very firm commitment, and I will set out the timeline and progress on that in due course.
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
F-35As—hard power; BBC World Service—soft power. Does the Prime Minister agree that the World Service is a crucial element of our soft convening power?
The Prime Minister
Yes. I have long been a supporter of the BBC World Service. My hon. Friend’s question chimes with other questions about the soft power of this country. We have incredible soft power and incredible strength in our diplomacy, and that very often achieves results in a way that then makes it less necessary to use the hard power.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
There is scepticism in my constituency that the increase in defence spending might create good local jobs there. As I have already pitched to the Chancellor and the Defence Secretary, and earlier this month to the Minister for Defence Procurement and Industry, alongside my local authority CEOs, I know that Huntingdon is recognised as the home of UK defence intelligence capability and of US operations in Europe as well as NATO’s. Given that 10% of the equipment budget is now pledged for developing new technology, along with the £400 million defence innovation fund, will the Prime Minister back my commitment to leveraging the designation of RAF Wyton as a Ministry of Defence trailblazer site to build a defence technology cluster that will create highly technical local jobs and build new defence capability from Huntingdon?
The Prime Minister
I think the hon. Member is in discussion with Ministers about this, and we look forward to taking that forward. In relation to the scepticism of his Huntingdon constituents, I reassure them that this increased defence spend will bring yield to Huntingdon in the defence-specific sectors and in the supply chains.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement and his leadership. The International Development Committee recently published a report showing that international humanitarian law is under threat like never before and that attacks on aid workers are rising. Can the Prime Minister assure the House that the UK will be a champion for IHL, and could he elaborate on conversations about upholding it in relation to Gaza as well as Sudan and the many other countries around the world ravaged by conflict?
The Prime Minister
We have an absolute commitment to international humanitarian law, and it is extremely important that we keep to that, whether in Gaza or Sudan. It is the framework through which we make our decisions.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
When it comes to the evils of terrorism and aggression across the middle east, all paths lead back to the Iranian regime—be that the sponsorship of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis or, indeed, at the heart of the regime, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Although I fully appreciate that the Prime Minister will not speculate on proscription from the Dispatch Box, will he at least reflect on how it can be that, despite calls from both sides of the House over many years to proscribe the IRGC, it still has not happened, not least given that he took the right and proper action to proscribe Palestine Action after the attack on Brize Norton last week? How is it that the IRGC still sits un-proscribed?
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman knows, we keep proscription under constant review and will not hesitate to take the most effective measures against the Iranian regime. He will know that we have already sanctioned the IRGC in its entirety, including individual commanders, but we do keep the matter under constant review.
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
I praise the Prime Minister for his work on the new 5% target and on ensuring that we reach it for our national security and core defence. Does he agree that just as the Labour Government in the 1940s helped to found NATO, this Labour Government could help found a multilateral defence development bank that would ensure that we reach 5% by the mid-2030s?
The Prime Minister
There is a debate going on across allies as to how we can work together on the increased spending: on the spend itself; on the financial arrangements, be that development banks or others arrangements; and on ensuring that we co-ordinate our capability, because the last thing we want is everybody spending more money in an unco-ordinated way. There has been intense discussion about that.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
The situation in Scotland is very difficult. I welcome the news that we are to go further with our at-sea deterrents, and of course the nuclear missile Trident boats are based at Faslane. But as we have heard, First Minister John Swinney and his SNP Administration do not back nuclear weapons. Further, they have created a hostile environment for defence firms in Scotland because they will not back any firms that make ordnance. This week we have also heard former First Minister Humza Yousaf claim—wrongly—that allowing our American allies to use the Prestwick air base to refuel is some kind of war crime. What can we do to nullify the threat to British security from these fifth columnists?
The Prime Minister
Beat them. This is not just the usual politics; it is a serious question of national security. The at-sea nuclear deterrent is housed in Scotland, and just a few months ago I went and saw one of the subs coming back in. It was a very humbling experience, quite frankly, and I got an even deeper sense of what they do for our country. It should be supported in its own right and as an essential deterrent. That matter is among the reasons that we need a change of Government in Scotland.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, which shows that international co-operation and the ability to forge relationships of trust and human empathy are signs of strength, not weakness. Our country is stronger for his leadership and pursuit of peace globally through diplomatic means.
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that we can deter war and defend our allies such as Ukraine only if outward-looking diplomacy is backed up by ever stronger armed forces and an ever stronger economy; that those matters ought to unify all in the House; and that it is very unfortunate that we have seen petty, party political games from the Leader of the Opposition?
The Prime Minister
I agree. All I can say is that, in fairness, I see on the faces of some Conservative Members disquiet at the approach that the Leader of the Opposition took. That is not surprising.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
Under the 5% defence investment pledge, resilience spending appears to include energy infrastructure. Given the evidence about Chinese-made cellular internet modules and kill switches, will he say categorically that China must be kept out of all critical infrastructure, including wind turbines and solar panels?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue. Obviously, we carefully review and monitor any Chinese involvement in any elements of security. But it is right that we now include resilience in our overall definition of national spend, and act accordingly.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for his commitment to keeping our country safe and for his effective diplomacy to that end. While our international aid budget is now diminished, it remains my belief that the work we do to prevent and respond to humanitarian crises around the world plays a crucial role in global stability and security and, in turn, in our own. Can the Prime Minister reaffirm his commitment to that vital role for the UK in the world?
The Prime Minister
Yes, I can. My hon. Friend is right to raise the issue and describe it as she did. We are a leader on this and continue to be. We want to get our aid budget back up, but in the meantime I want to work with other countries to find other ways of financing that support as a matter of some urgency.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
I welcome the increase in defence spending, but how on earth is the Prime Minister going to pay for it when his party cannot agree on a small reduction in the welfare bill?
The Prime Minister
When we went to 2.5%, we set out in clear terms both the date and the way we would pay for it. That is the way we do business on the Government side of the House. For 14 years, the Conservative party lost control of the economy, left our armed forces hollowed out and left a £22 billion black hole. Frankly, they are in no position to lecture anyone about these issues—still less after the response of the Leader of the Opposition, which shows exactly why the party is sliding into irrelevance.
Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)
It is clear today that the Leader of the Opposition should never represent the United Kingdom on the world stage —it was absolutely outrageous.
I am grateful to my right hon. and learned Friend for his statement. Following the comments of other hon. Members, may I ask him what assessment he has made of the potential opportunities for Scotland-based defence and aerospace industries, which already support hundreds of jobs in Coatbridge and Bellshill, arising from the expectation that spending will reach 4.1% of GDP by 2027? Does he share my concern that the SNP’s disjointed defence policy risks jobs and investment in Scotland? We need to fight that at all costs.
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend should not worry too much about the Leader of the Opposition representing our country—she never will. If she did, presumably the chair at the NATO summit would have a little sticky note on it saying, “Busy at PMQs”. That is how unserious her point is.
On the substantive question of jobs in Scotland, there is now the real potential to build on what Scotland does. It has a proud history in relation to our defence and security. This provides an opportunity to build on that platform.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Prime Minister very much for his statement. Nobody in the House can doubt the sincerity of his careful words and commitment to what is best for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland at the G7 and NATO summit. The Prime Minister will be aware of my support for Israel and that of so many in this great nation. The situation was, I believe, one of the major issues of the summit. Can the Prime Minister please outline whether time was taken, with our closest ally, the United States of America, to discuss steps that can be taken to cut the head off the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, ensure that the USA bombing of the Iranian nuclear programme was a success and thereby secure a truce and lasting peace in the middle east?
The Prime Minister
I assure the hon. Gentleman that we have that discussion with our US allies, both at leader level and between our teams, on an ongoing and constant basis. Israel has the right to be safe and secure, and it is neither safe nor secure at the moment. We have to be absolutely clear about that and about the right of Israel to defend itself. That means discussions about the IRGC and Iran, which has been a constant source of threat, terror and conflict in the region. Yes, we discussed not just the attack on Saturday, but the further measures that can be taken to ensure that Iran never has the capability to develop nuclear weapons.
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement and his leadership—something that I am sure is welcomed by our allies around the world, if not by the Opposition.
My right hon. and learned Friend mentions that there is now a window of opportunity for peace in the middle east. I am sure that we would all want that to come to fruition. However, given the continuation of deadly attacks on Palestinian people seeking food, can the Prime Minister advise, following his discussions, whether there is any prospect of Israel allowing the United Nations and other humanitarian organisations to resume food distribution in an ordered and fair way?
The Prime Minister
They should do that, and we are urging that they do. The current arrangements are intolerable and are never going to work; we need to be really clear about that. We will continue to urge that, with our allies and talking to leaders across the region, as my hon. Friend would expect. But now is also the time to push on for the broader ceasefire, to alleviate the situation more generally and allow a path to open for the long-term conflict resolution that is needed.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
It is the first duty of any Government and Prime Minister to keep this country safe. The Prime Minister takes that role incredibly seriously, in stark contrast to what we have seen today from the Leader of the Opposition.
The Prime Minister has visited Blackpool many times since becoming leader of our party. At Blackpool sixth-form college, young people told him that they were crying out for local jobs in the Blackpool area, to keep them there. Will he ensure that the defence increase to 5%, which is welcome, creates the decent, well paid jobs on the Fylde coast so that young people in Blackpool can get those jobs where they live?
The Prime Minister
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s question. I have visited Blackpool many times, as he knows. I know first hand just how important it is for those young people to see money going into their economy, with jobs in Blackpool for them. I profoundly remember asking a group of 17-year-olds, I think, at a sixth-form college in Blackpool how many were proud to be from Blackpool. They all put their hands up. When I asked them how many thought that their future jobs would be in Blackpool, only one put their hand up; the rest all thought they would have to leave Blackpool to get the jobs they wanted. We need to turn that around. This gives us an opportunity to start doing that.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Prime Minister for his statement today. From a personal point of view, I thank him for his recent visit to Harlow and Downs primary school, which recently received an excellent Ofsted report.
Does the Prime Minister agree that to achieve the sustainable and long-term peace that we all so desperately want—in the middle east, in Gaza, in Ukraine and in Sudan—we must work together with one voice and with all our NATO allies? That is why his leadership on a global level is so important and why it is so important that he attends all these events to represent our proud nation.
The Prime Minister
My most recent visit to the primary school was to roll out our free school meals policy. I was happy to do that by serving school meals myself—if all else fails, I’ve got a back-up.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. At a time like this, the House usually comes together and speaks with one voice, and we are the more powerful for it. President Zelensky has told me on a number of occasions how much that means for his people. In fairness to the Conservative party, it has always been resolute on Ukraine. The Leader of the Opposition needs to look again at her approach. At a time like this, the sooner we get back to the kind of cross-party unity that we had, the better. Our adversaries know that when they see unity here, that is much more of a problem for them than when they see unserious division.
Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) (No. 2) Bill
Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 56), That the Bill be now read a Second time.
Question agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a Second time.
Question put forthwith, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
Question agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed.
Armed Forces Day
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for the Armed Forces (Luke Pollard)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Armed Forces Day.
This week, our nation comes together to give profound thanks to the men and women of our armed forces, their families and veterans—the heroes who give and sacrifice so much for their country at a time when the world is becoming increasingly dangerous, unpredictable and insecure. Right now, our armed forces are helping Ukraine to defend itself against the might of Russia by supplying kit and equipment, nearly three and a half years into a war that Putin thought would be over in three days. Our armed forces are in Singapore with the UK carrier strike group led by HMS Prince of Wales, strengthening Britain’s ties with the Indo-Pacific. They are operating as part of every NATO mission alongside our allies, keeping the peace in zones of potential conflict, and our people are working in the middle east to de-escalate tensions and stabilise the region. Our armed forces are contributing to UN peacekeeping forces around the world, helping to bring hope to war-torn communities, and they are protecting our shores at home, ready at a moment’s notice to respond to any emerging threats.
The members of our armed forces are truly the best of Britain, recognised globally for their professionalism and dedication. This week, in Armed Forces Week, we have a chance to say thank you: to them for their service; to their families for their understanding at the times when they are away; and to the people in the defence industries, the supply chain and the technology companies who support our men and women in uniform and help them continue to have the fighting edge that keeps our country safe.
Apart from the years affected by covid restrictions, 2024 was the first since the inception of Armed Forces Day in which there was no national event. This Government are proud to have restored that this year, backing three days of celebrations in Cleethorpes. As my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) knows, it is a community that carries a long tradition of not just honouring our armed forces, but shaping and supporting them. From the local RAF station at North Coates, which was home to the Coastal Command strike wing during world war two, disrupting enemy supply chains with great success, to today’s active veteran groups such as NEL4Heroes, which does outstanding work in North East Lincolnshire helping veterans to return to civilian life.
Although the biggest celebrations will take place in Cleethorpes, where the Defence Secretary will be this weekend, there are more than 180 other events taking place across our nation. Earlier this week, my ministerial colleague Lord Coaker was among the large crowds that turned out in Northern Ireland to celebrate Armed Forces Day.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I was fortunate to be there and had the opportunity to meet Lord Coaker. I was clear to him, as were the 60,000 people who turned out to commend and celebrate such a wonderful occasion. Will the Minister outline later on what can be done to recruit more Territorial Army soldiers? Will there be flexibility with employers and jobs and courses that people can do to enlarge the numbers of cadets?
Luke Pollard
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his years of service. It was in Westminster Hall yesterday that he added up all the years that he served in uniform. I think it was 14 and a half years in total in various roles.
Luke Pollard
I thank him for his service to our country. It is vital that we address the retention and recruitment crisis that we inherited from the previous Government. We are making good progress in that regard. A key part of that is not only recruiting new people to our regular forces, but making it easier to join the reserves. Whether people serve full time, part time or in their spare time, there is an opportunity for people around the country to contribute to our armed forces.
The Minister for Veterans and People will set out further steps as to how we will improve our reserves as we approach the armed forces Bill in the next session of Parliament. He will make the case that improving our reserves makes us safer, but also provides more opportunity for the nation to have a closer connection with those people who serve as well.
Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
One of the 180 events that the Minister mentioned will be Armed Forces Day in Andover, which I will attend on Saturday. As the Minister knows, Andover is home to the Army’s land forces headquarters. Will he reflect on the importance of the work of celebrating the armed forces in the communities that physically embrace their headquarters, camps and residences, to sustain that connection between the non-uniformed civilian population and those who protect them on a daily basis?
Luke Pollard
I thank the right hon. Member for his attendance at an Armed Forces Day event this weekend. As someone who represents Devonport, which is home to western Europe’s largest naval dockyard, I am acutely aware of the relationship, the important history and the connections today between our military, the civilians who, in Devonport’s case, support the fleet, and our wider community, including veterans. It is absolutely right that we tell the story of that connection, not just by looking back at the battles of previous years and those people who never returned from wars, but by making the case that investing in our defence today creates good, well-paid jobs. It provides opportunities for our young people and it is one of the sources of great pride that our Army, our Navy and our Air Force all feature among the top five employers of apprentices in the country. It is a huge opportunity to celebrate the skills that we have and the connections between our people. All our communities are proud of our armed forces, and this weekend is a great opportunity to say that again.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
My hon. Friend knows that recently I had the great privilege of visiting our base in Erbil, in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, where I saw for myself the dedicated service of the troops and their officers, who are doing huge work to help that regional government, thereby enhancing regional and British security. They are a credit to this country and we owe them a debt of gratitude. We should also remember that there are so many servicemen and women overseas who are doing difficult work, sometimes in harm’s way. On Armed Forces Day, we must remember all those serving officers and soldiers as well.
Luke Pollard
May I thank my hon. Friend for his remarks? It is a good reminder that on Armed Forces Day and in Armed Forces Week, there will be parliamentarians from all sides of the House visiting local communities and making the case for the armed forces in their communities. There will be people from communities right around our country, however, who will not be at those celebrations because they will be serving on the frontlines overseas, helping to project UK power and influence, helping to stabilise regions and helping to ensure that we de-escalate tensions. The work that our forces do in the middle east may have been in the news quite a lot recently, but the work that they do that is often not covered in the news is just as vital for our national security and worthy of our praise and thanks. I am sure that there is cross-party support for the work that they do across the middle east.
The Minister for Defence Procurement and Industry will be in Liverpool this weekend, celebrating alongside her community of Liverpool Garston at Armed Forces Day events. The Minister for Veterans and People will be in Coventry, having completed a tour of many of our communities nationwide making the case for further investment in services to support our veterans. Indeed, supporting those who have served is a vital part of this Government’s work. Many celebrations will take place across Scotland and Wales, including in Edinburgh where the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, my hon. Friend the Member for Midlothian (Kirsty McNeill) will be attending. I will be back home in Plymouth, which is home not only to Devonport but to Stonehouse, the spiritual home of the Royal Marines. We will be out in force on the Hoe on Saturday. For those people not familiar with Plymouth’s geography and our international viewers, the Hoe has a wonderful clifftop view of Plymouth sound—it is nothing more sinister than that.
As the son of a Royal Navy submariner, I am proud to represent my home town, which is not only steeped in military history, but plays a pivotal role in protecting Britain today. Having grown up as a Navy brat, I know that many remarkable people in defence tend to dismiss their achievements as “just part of the job”—a humility that defines service in our country. But I know what they do, how they go well beyond the expectations of a normal day job, how they shoulder immense responsibilities with great modesty and, supported by their families, how they perform the ultimate public service.
Through the Government’s strategic defence review and defence reform, we are putting much more emphasis on our people and on renewing the nation’s contract with those who serve. The most troubling thing I have seen recently in relation to our people was the continuous attitude survey, which revealed that only a quarter of our service personnel believe that they are valued by society. I encourage Members who have not read the latest continuous attitude survey to do so: it tells the story of what our people think. Although we are now seeing morale stabilising, after a decade of it falling across all three services, the fact that they do not feel valued by society should be a wake-up call for all of us in thinking about how we talk about and support our armed forces.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
I apologise for not being in the Chamber when the Minister referred to my constituency earlier. This weekend we will host the national Armed Forces Day event, which will be fantastic. He mentions remembering our veterans and our people, and Saturday will be a true celebration of all the work that so many people put into making sure that we are safe and secure every day.
Luke Pollard
I thank my hon. Friend for all the work that she put into making the case for Cleethorpes to host the first of the renewed national day events. I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is looking forward to attending events in Cleethorpes this weekend and to hearing not only from those people who serve today, but the young people of the cadets in her community, who may be those who serve in the future, and the veterans who have served our nation. I am looking forward to events in Plymouth, but I know that the events in Cleethorpes will be the centre of our national attention this weekend, and rightly so.
Sir James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)
Does the Minister recognise that the UK’s armed forces are a visible manifestation of the philosophy and values that underpin the country? If society does not value the armed forces, would he concede that it might be because we have consistently failed to defend the principles and values that underpin our society? We should confront the accusations, for example, that this is an inherently racist country, which it absolutely is not, and that our history is not something to be proud of. Perhaps then wider society would appreciate the men and women who defend not just the physical country but our values, our history and our philosophy.
Luke Pollard
I share the right hon. Gentleman’s passion for telling our nation’s story. To tell our full story, we have to explain the good bits and, sometimes, the bad bits, but at all times we can look at the bravery, courage and service of our armed forces as a source of national pride. I also look at our armed forces today as the embodiment of some of our British values. I believe in equality: it is very important to me personally. When I think about our soldiers operating in Estonia at the moment, ready to deter a Russian move across the border, the colour of their skin, their religion, where they come from or their accent do not matter. All that matters is that in that unit, everyone has each other’s backs and is proud of our country, proud of their service and proud of the reasons they are there.
Armed forces week is an opportunity to remind people of the difficult jobs we ask our people to do and to thank them for it. The right hon. Gentleman is right to talk about the values that stand behind the uniform and why the flag they carry on their arms matters so much—it is not just a piece of cloth; it represents British values that we should all be proud of.
For that reason, it is important that we recognise that our service personnel need to feel more valued. The figure has plummeted over the past 12 years. We know that words will not address the problem. Only action will, and that is why it was so important to award our service personnel their biggest pay rise for more than two decades and to follow that up with another above-inflation pay rise this year. It is a source of great pride to me as the Minister for the Armed Forces that, for the first time, we can say that every single person in uniform is now paid the living wage. That should always have been the case, but sadly it was not; it is now.
Our armed forces deserve a lot more than just a decent salary. The cold, damp and mouldy homes that many have been living in are a betrayal of their service. After buying back 36,000 homes from the private sector that were sold off under a previous Conservative Government and saving taxpayers more than £600,000 a day in rent payments, we are delivering a generational renewal of military accommodation, with at least £7 billion of funding in this Parliament to tackle the poor state of forces housing.
Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)
I take this opportunity to mark an important week for our armed forces. I welcome everything my hon. Friend says about support for our armed forces and their families by way of investment in their homes and more money in their pockets. Does he agree that supporting our armed forces goes way beyond just the equipment that they need on the frontline? It is about making sure that their families are valued through the support that the Government can give them and that they receive from the communities they live in.
Luke Pollard
I could not agree with my hon. Friend more: that is so important. I am somewhat guilty of this myself, but many of our defence debates have been about kit, platforms and—if I have anything to do with it—frigates. We talk about the equipment, but we need to talk about our people. At the heart of the strategic defence review, and the Government’s policies, is talking more about the families of those who serve. That is why I hope that the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill will become law soon. It puts an emphasis on allowing service families to access the commissioner to make the case that it is the whole defence family—those who serve in uniform and their family members who back them in their service—that needs to be valued by this nation. I believe that view is shared on a cross-party basis, and we now need to ensure that it is featured in our legislation and in the day-to-day operations of our military. There is more to do on that.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
On the selling off of military homes and the buying back of them by the Labour Government, will the Minister acknowledge that the negotiations for that deal started in May 2024 under the Conservative Government and were completed by the Labour Government?
Luke Pollard
Indeed, and when the announcement was officially made, I recall standing at the Dispatch Box and thanking the shadow Secretary of State for Defence, who is not here today, for his work on it. It was a terrible privatisation—truly awful. It represented the worst value for taxpayers and it has doomed many of our forces families to appalling accommodation for far too long. Now that that privatisation has ended and we have brought those homes back into public control, we can invest in them. We need to do that at pace, because people are living today in accommodation with mould and damp. That is not good enough. We need to proceed at pace, and the Minister for Veterans and People who leads on this work in the MOD is as impatient as I am to see the improvements—as I know the hon. Gentleman will be, as someone who represents a military constituency.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
For the record, the shadow Defence Secretary is not here because he has a very important personal family commitment today. I am honoured to stand in for him.
Has the Minister seen our proposals for a ringfenced armed forces housing association, to provide better quality accommodation for armed forces personnel and their families?
Luke Pollard
I am sure the House will agree that the right hon. Gentleman is by no means a poor substitute for the shadow Defence Secretary.
We plan to publish our defence housing strategy later this year, which no doubt was not at all in the minds of the shadow Front-Bench team when they published their proposals ahead of time. I encourage the right hon. Gentleman to wait for the full work to be published in due course, but improving defence housing has to be a priority, because for many years as a nation, we have not delivered what our forces deserve—that will now change.
This year, we extended the ability to reclaim the costs of wraparound childcare to many of those deployed overseas, and next year we will go further and cover all overseas areas to help make family life a little easier. We are legislating for an Armed Forces Commissioner—an independent voice to help improve service life. We made a manifesto commitment to bring the armed forces covenant fully into law—a promise made by the nation that those who defend it will be treated fairly and will not be disadvantaged because of their service. That includes, for example, ensuring that service children have the same access to education as other children. We are transforming recruitment, and hope that many young people will be inspired to join up after attending Armed Forces Day events this weekend. We are also overhauling access to care and support for veterans through the Valour programme.
I turn to veterans because although Armed Forces Day is an opportunity to thank those people in uniform, we should also use it as an opportunity to thank those people who have served.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
I very much welcome the work being done to bring the covenant into wider, and legislative, effect, with consequences where it is not applied. That will be important in delivering services to our armed forces right across the public sector, but there is a financial consequence. Parliament and Government need to seriously consider how that financial consequence is borne and distributed to ensure that those public services are empowered and financed to support armed forces personnel and, just as importantly, their wider families in the best way they can.
Luke Pollard
I agree with the hon. Gentleman; it is important that the pledge is made in action and deeds, not just words. If we look at the implementation of the armed forces covenant across the country at the moment, some areas are exceptional and have embraced not just the words of the covenant but the spirit behind it, and others are perhaps a little further behind on the journey. When we look at central Government compared with local government, there is a distinction between the services and the offer. That is why we are putting it fully into law. I hope that one thing we will be able to do in having a debate on putting the covenant fully into law is to share the best practice we see in local councils up and down the country.
In this place, there is sometimes a temptation to believe that all good ideas must come from the Dispatch Box. I certainly do not believe that, when I can see brilliant councillors of all parties making the case for improving the lives of veterans, those people who serve and, perhaps most importantly, their families. Where the covenant grips most successfully is where we can improve provision for children who may suffer disadvantage because their parents who serve move around so frequently, which means they sometimes do not get the same access to educational support, special educational needs and disabilities support and other aspects. When that debate happens—it will probably be later this year or the beginning of next year—I hope that all hon. Members will be able to participate and take something from that debate to amplify the work of their local councils. Probably each and every Member in this place will have something good to share about the work being done in their area.
We owe a substantial debt of gratitude to all those who have served their country. The Government have an enduring duty to recognise their extraordinary contribution and to support them after service. The majority of veterans go on to have successful careers and lives. We are helping them to make the best use of the diverse skills and experience that they have gained—for example, through the career transition partnerships and Op ASCEND—but a minority do not find the transition easy and may need extra support. We are creating a new £50 million network of Valour-recognised support centres across the UK to give veterans easier access to essential care and help.
Just today, we launched the Valour pilot in the north-west region, at the Imperial War Museum North. We have announced £75 million to recognise the historic wrongs experienced by LGBT veterans in the armed forces, which is significantly above the level recommended in the Etherton review. We have also committed additional funding to maintain veterans’ homelessness support programmes, ensuring that those at risk of homelessness have continued access to specialist help.
Ben Obese-Jecty
I appreciate that the Government are working on this issue, but could the Minister update us on the work being done to waive visa fees for families and dependants of our Commonwealth service personnel?
Luke Pollard
The hon. Member will know that the Ministry of Defence recently published a written ministerial statement on how we can improve recruitment from the Commonwealth. It is not just about how we expand the pipeline coming into our armed forces; we also need to recognise and support those who might be at the end of their service to get the support they need. We have a manifesto commitment to deliver that. The Defence Secretary has spoken to the Home Secretary about this, and our officials are in dialogue about it. I hope that the Minister for Veterans and People, who looks after this area, will be able to announce progress in due course. The hon. Member and I share a strong sense that there is a wrong to be righted here, and those people who serve our country for a good period of time should be able to settle here. I think progress will be made, but I recognise his interest in that happening.
The magnificent VE Day commemorations, as well as the equally historic 80th anniversary of VJ Day in August, have been widely acknowledged as perhaps the last major opportunity to thank those who fought in the second world war. But we are also slowly losing the generation who did national service after the war and, with them, the living bridge they provide to our armed forces. We need to reconnect society with our armed forces and widen participation in national resilience. This weekend’s festivities are a great way to kick-start that process, but, as our strategic defence review made clear, we have to be much more proactive as a country about rebuilding those connections, particularly with young people.
Half of the Army’s current crop of regimental sergeant majors were once cadets, so we will boost the cadet forces by 30% by 2030, creating opportunities for 42,000 more young people to be a cadet. We will introduce a voluntary gap year scheme for school and college leavers and develop a new UK strategic reserve by 2030—a fitting objective considering that yesterday was Reserves Day, when we were able to thank the many thousands of reservists who serve this country. They greatly bolster our capability at times of crisis, serving across defence, from the back office to the frontline. They give us the skills, scale and ability to meet the threats we face at home and overseas in a cost-effective way, as the Minister for Veterans and People can attest after serving alongside them on various tours.
I have seen personally the enormous benefits that experience with our armed forces can offer people, particularly young people: purpose, adventure, social mobility, and a unique sense of camaraderie and self-achievement. For many people, it is a route to a much better life. We want to make many more young people aware of the opportunities on offer and the chance to see where service life can take them.
As I noted earlier, we are taking decisive action to address the recruitment crisis that we inherited. The tortuously slow process that caused so much frustration is being transformed. For example, we have eliminated more than 100 outdated medical recruitment policies and we are slashing the time it takes to access medical records from weeks to hours. Our objective is to reduce the time of flight from application to starting at a training establishment. The new 10-30 policy introduced by the Secretary of State, which means applicants will get a decision on a provisional application within 10 days and a start date within 30 days, is a good step towards improving this process, but we know there is much more to do.
Army recruitment has been completely restructured, and we have acted to keep hold of valued staff who are most at risk of leaving—for example, by introducing retention payments for Army privates, lance corporals and aircraft engineers. The results speak for themselves: year-on-year inflow of recruits is up by 19% and outflow is down by 7%. The Royal Navy has exceeded its yearly recruitment target, and Royal Air Force applications are up by a third compared with early 2024. Applications to join the Army are at their highest level for seven years.
John Slinger
As we are discussing the armed services’ recruitment problems, does my hon. Friend agree it is very helpful that this Government were able to deliver an above-inflation pay rise of 4.5% for service personnel, recognising their extraordinary professionalism? In combination with last year’s 6% headline award, that represents a cumulative pay award of 10.5% since July 2024, which can only help with the issues he is discussing.
Luke Pollard
It absolutely does. The strategic defence review talks about a whole-of-society approach, and I view that from both an inside and an outside perspective. As a society, we need to value our armed forces more, recognising that we all have a role in building resilience and improving how our nation is defended, but we must also recognise that armed forces personnel need to feel more valued by the whole of society. Ensuring that our people are paid well and live in decent homes is the foundation of that, and I hope that one day this House will not need to debate the quality of our military accommodation, because the quality will be such that, when we ask our people to move around the country—whether into single living accommodation or service family accommodation—it is simply a given that it is decent. That is our objective, but we have a lot of work still to do.
I hope that Members across the House will join our armed forces and our communities this weekend to celebrate the work of our service personnel. As we set about reconnecting the nation to its military, we must remember that service and sacrifice are not values confined to the history books; they are just as important today as they have ever been, and they are just as visible if we tell their stories. Those values are embodied in Britain’s armed forces. There has never been a more important time to thank them for the fantastic work they do, or to promote the benefits of an armed forces career to young people. To all who serve, all who have served and all their families, we give our deep thanks. To those who might serve in the future, we say: come along to an event this weekend and find out what our brilliant armed forces could do for you.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)
Order. I am conscious that some Members arrived after the start of the debate. Ordinarily, that would preclude them from speaking, but I understand that the Prime Minister’s statement has slightly thrown our timings. My intention is therefore to accommodate all those in the Chamber who wish to speak, but inevitably those who arrived late will have to take their turn. I call the shadow Minister.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
Given the topic, I am genuinely honoured to open this debate on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition on the subject of Armed Forces Day. I had the honour to be present in New Palace Yard on Monday to watch members of the armed forces raise the armed forces flag in Parliament, in a ceremony presided over by Mr Speaker and his Chaplain, the Rev. Canon Mark Birch MVO. It was a joyous occasion, and I am pleased to say it was very well attended by many MPs.
My opposite number, the Armed Forces Minister, is the proud son of a submariner, and I am the equally proud son of Stoker First Class Reginald Francois, who served on the minesweeper HMS Bressay on D-day. We are both naval brats, as he put it—at least after a fashion.
It is now established that Armed Forces Day is held on the last Saturday of June. This Saturday there will be many ceremonies across the length and breadth of the United Kingdom, including in my county of Essex, and I hope to attend the celebration in Basildon, the town in which I grew up. This is a time when people across our four nations come together to celebrate the role of the whole armed forces family—regulars, reserves, veterans, cadets and, of course, their loved ones—in defending our country and our democratic way of life. I will say something about those four categories—regulars, reserves, cadets and veterans—in my remarks this afternoon.
Beginning with reserves, Armed Forces Day and, indeed, Armed Forces Week normally enjoy bipartisan—perhaps I should say tripartisan—support in Parliament. Touching on this allows me to say something about the value of the reserves to our armed forces. In doing so, I declare an interest having served as an infantry officer in the 5th Battalion the Royal Anglian Regiment, in the Territorial Army, in the 1980s during the cold war, when —this dates me—the Berlin wall was still up. I greatly appreciate the extremely important role that our reserves in the Royal Naval Reserve, the Army Reserve, the Royal Auxiliary Air Force, the RAF Volunteer Reserve and others play in supporting our regulars in the defence of the realm.
In that context, I recently saw an analysis showing that, following the 2024 general election, there are now 17 Conservative MPs who have served or are serving in either the regular or reserve armed forces of the Crown. However, the Conservatives have no monopoly on military service, as the same survey rightly showed that Labour has 13 MPs in a similar position and the Liberal Democrats have eight. For completeness, I should add that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) also served in the Territorial Army, so he is with us on that point. I sometimes feel that he is always with us—he is virtually omnipresent in the Chamber.
It is therefore true to say that the armed forces enjoy support across the political spectrum, at least from those of us who are here. I merely note in passing that, yet again, when defence is being discussed in this Chamber there is no Reform MP present to grace our proceedings. It is ironic and telling that Members of a party that likes to wrap itself in the flag—a flag it does not own—cannot be bothered to turn up to debate the service of those who loyally serve under that flag. Bluntly, Reform does not do defence. Nevertheless, I hope that most of what I say in the next few minutes will be broadly consensual, with perhaps one exception, which I will come to near the end.
The role of our armed forces in defending our way of life down the centuries is just as pertinent today as it has ever been, with the war in Ukraine, where brave Ukrainians continue to resist Vladimir Putin’s barbaric and illegal invasion of their country, alongside the continued turmoil in the middle east.
On the regulars, those who serve in our armed forces deserve our unstinting and ongoing support. Numerous studies show that the vast majority of people who serve in the armed forces benefit greatly from the experience. As well as serving their country, they often learn valuable skills and trades that make them highly marketable in the civilian jobs market—indeed, that can be a problem for retention, as the Minister intimated. When I served as a Defence Minister, albeit over a decade ago, one powerful statistic was that 80% of those who left the armed forces found a job within six months, and I believe the figures are equally good, if not better, today. People who are smart, disciplined and trained to turn up on time and to be resourceful are always likely to be attractive to employers.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
Veterans play an important role in my Glastonbury and Somerton constituency, where 11% of households include at least one veteran. However, female veterans are more than 10% less likely to be employed than male veterans. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that we must put more support into helping female veterans find the right employment after their service?
Mr Francois
I agree. We should do everything we can to help all veterans, whatever their gender, to find good employment after their service, and that certainly includes female veterans.
Forgive me, Mr Deputy Speaker, but as it is taking place in the hon. Lady’s constituency, why on earth are Kneecap being allowed to appear at the Glastonbury festival? Why on earth have the organisers allowed that to take place? [Interruption.]
Moving on, we need to bear in mind that without—
Sarah Dyke
On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. If I may just correct the right hon. Gentleman, the Glastonbury festival site is not in my constituency.
Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)
That is not a point of order for the Chair, but I think it is helpful to have the record corrected.
Mr Francois
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
We need to bear employability very much in mind, as without skilled regular personnel to maintain and operate even the most expensive and sophisticated kit, from Typhoon and F-35 fighters to Type 45 destroyers and main battle tanks, we cannot achieve operational success. In short, without well trained people, the equipment counts for nothing and does not have the deterrent effect that we seek. When asked at the Royal United Services Institute earlier this week about the single biggest challenge that the Royal Navy faces, the fleet commander, Vice-Admiral Andrew Burns, replied:
“It’s people right now. It’s the quantity of people, and it’s not just recruitment, it’s retention.”
For context, this is not a uniquely British problem. All our Five Eyes partners face similar challenges, even the United States, and I shall return to that in a moment.
Let me turn to cadets. We in this country are fortunate to have an active and enthusiastic cadet movement, and while we welcome the proposals in the White Paper to expand the cadets even further, we would like to see more detail about how exactly that will be achieved. Cadet units play a vital role in fostering disciplined teamwork and a sense of service among young people, providing invaluable opportunities for personal development, and serving as a pathway to a career in the armed forces, should the young person desire that.
Whether we are Ministers, shadow Ministers or otherwise, we are all ultimately constituency MPs, so I pay tribute to the Army cadet detachments in Rayleigh and Wickford, which are part of C company in the Essex Army Cadet Force, both of which I have visited. I hope to see the Rayleigh detachment again shortly, not least as it appears that it will need to find a new home within the next several years. I also highlight the valuable work undertaken by 1474 (Wickford) Squadron of the Air Training Corps, and their sister unit, 1476 (Rayleigh) Squadron Air Training Corps; I declare an interest in the latter, as I recently had the honour of being appointed honorary squadron president. Its motto is “Amanogawa”, which is Japanese for heavenly river, and I can confirm that they are in full flow.
Over the years, I have heard a number of hon. Members pay full tribute in the Chamber to their cadet units; I will chance my arm and say that I am sure we will rightly hear praise for more cadet units before the debate is out. They are a fundamental part of the armed forces family. I thank not only the young people who sign up, but those adults who give of their time, voluntarily, to provide instruction and leadership for these outstanding young people.
Let me turn to veterans. As one example of work that can be done to protect veterans, I commend to the House an initiative known as the Forcer protocol. The idea is named after Alan Forcer, who served in the British Army for a number of years in several theatres, but who sadly took his own life after a struggle with complex post-traumatic stress disorder. His widow, Claire Lilly, came to see me at my constituency surgery a number of years ago, and told me that she was determined to channel her grief in a positive way, by establishing a system to help find and protect veterans who go missing. When I met Claire, I was struck by her absolute determination to succeed, and I am pleased to tell the House that that is exactly what she did.
In short, the Forcer protocol is now a standard operating procedure for many police forces. It is similar in some ways to the Herbert protocol for people who go missing with dementia, but it has special features that are designed specifically to assist former service personnel. In essence, it works like this. People who have a veteran in their family who they believe may be vulnerable can register their details confidentially, including known associates and favourite haunts, with an organisation known as Safe and Found Online. In the event that a veteran goes missing, the family, by releasing a PIN code, can make that information immediately available to the police, to assist them in their search for the potentially vulnerable veteran. The initiative was trialled by Greater Manchester police over six months. The trial was an outstanding success; GMP reported that it had allowed them to make positive and timely interventions that undoubtedly saved the lives of dozens of veterans in the Greater Manchester area.
As a result of that highly successful trial, the Forcer protocol is being rolled out across police forces nationwide. We had an event to encourage progress in the Commons in November 2024, and I am pleased to tell the House that at very short notice, the new Minister for Veterans and People attended to give his personal support, for which I thank him again today. In an equally bipartisan spirit, I pay tribute to the actor and TV celebrity Mr Ross Kemp, aka Grant Mitchell, for his unwavering support for that initiative, for the work that he has done for veterans more widely, and for his amazing documentary with the Royal Anglian Regiment—my old regiment—in Afghanistan. Thank you, Ross, for everything you do for our armed forces, past and present. We know your heart is absolutely in it, and we are grateful.
I am delighted to report that my constabulary in Essex is formally adopting the Forcer protocol today at a ceremony at Colchester. It is deliberately doing so in Armed Forces Week. Thirteen forces, including Essex, are now using that life-saving procedure. It is estimated that since the initial trial with GMP and the roll-out across other forces in this country, the process has saved literally hundreds of veterans. I commend Claire Lilly for everything that she and her loyal band of supporters have done to make this possible. We have another event in the Commons this November, by which time I very much hope that all 43 police forces in England and Wales will be fully signed up. Well done, Claire. Alan would be proud of you.
As I mentioned earlier, despite the tri-partisan nature of this debate, there is, I am afraid, one issue on which I feel that the Government and the Opposition will not agree: the Government’s proposed treatment of Northern Ireland veterans. More than 300,000 regular British soldiers served in Northern Ireland during the troubles between 1969 and 2007. That highly challenging task, known as Operation Banner, was one of the longest-running continual exercises in the history of the British Army. During that long and at times highly dangerous deployment, more than 700 British soldiers were killed assisting the Ulster Defence Regiment and the then Royal Ulster Constabulary GC, now the Police Service of Northern Ireland, in upholding the rule of law in Northern Ireland. Many thousands of soldiers were maimed for life by both Republican and so-called loyalist bombs, while trying to hold the line in an incredibly complex and dangerous situation.
I have seen many memorials in my time, but perhaps one of the most poignant was the Royal Ulster Constabulary memorial at its headquarters in Knock, on which are commemorated hundreds of officers who gave their life, working alongside the Army, to attempt to uphold the rule of law in Northern Ireland. Imagine the utter dismay of those veterans who served in the British Army in that highly complex theatre at the news that the Labour Government intend to drive through a remedial order, under the auspices of the Human Rights Act 1998, effectively to remove key provisions in the Conservative-inspired Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. That will have two very important effects. First, it will reopen the endless cycle of investigation and reinvestigation, often via coronial inquests, to which many British Army soldiers have already been subject. Secondly—I wonder whether many Labour Members are aware of this—that same remedial order, which their Whips will urge them to vote for later this autumn, will make it easier for Gerry Adams and his associates to sue the British Government, and ultimately the British taxpayer. This is two-tier justice at its absolute worst.
The veterans have initiated a parliamentary petition, “Protect Northern Ireland Veterans from Prosecutions”, which amassed more than 100,000 signatures in well under a month. As of noon today, the petition has achieved more than 145,000 signatures, and it is still going strong. As a result of that public support, we will debate that counter-productive policy, which is a looming disaster for armed forces recruitment and retention, in Parliament next month. We Conservative Members vigorously resist that wholly misguided remedial order, which is designed to aid Gerry Adams while throwing our brave veterans to the wolves. We warmly welcome the Daily Mail’s campaign, launched this morning, to defend our veterans. As the Daily Mail’s editorial powerfully put it this morning,
“It is profoundly unfair that frail ex-servicemen will continue to live in dread of a knock on the door, by the authorities, while IRA murderers sleep easily, with letters of immunity, handed to them by Tony Blair.”
I think that puts it rather well.
It is worth recording that many of the soldiers who served in Northern Ireland were recruited from what we might now call red wall towns, from Blackburn to Bury and from Bolton to Burnley. They were then ordered across the Irish sea to help uphold the rule of law. Many of those surviving veterans are now in their 70s or even their 80s, and I suspect that many Labour MPs would find it extremely difficult to explain to them and their loved ones that they are taking this action just because their Government are literally obsessed with the Human Rights Act 1998. Conservative Members will bitterly oppose the remedial order; Labour Members will need to look into their consciences and, hopefully, when the Division bell rings, do the same.
With that important exception, I hope that hon. Members from across the House who are in the Chamber can agree that we value immensely the work of the whole armed forces family, and everything that they do to keep our country safe. Without those people who have the courage to take the King’s shilling, as the old phrase has it, put on a uniform and, if ultimately necessary, risk their life to keep this country free, we would have no guarantee of our precious democracy.
Perhaps the most fitting way to end my humble contribution will be to quote the words of Rudyard Kipling from his famous poem, “Recessional”, which was written in 1897 to commemorate Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee. Those who know the poem will know that there is no hint of jingoism about it—indeed, quite the reverse. It warns about the power of divine judgment and the humility of kings. As Kipling put it:
“The tumult and the shouting dies;
The Captains and the Kings depart:
Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice,
An humble and a contrite heart.
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!”
Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)
I thank the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), for sharing with us those powerful words by Kipling, which have sunk into our national consciousness. I appreciate the cordial nature of the debate between the Minister for the Armed Forces and the shadow Minister. We three were together earlier this week for a debate on recruitment in the north-east, which was also incredibly cordial. This is a great opportunity to continue that conversation.
In Stockton, we celebrated Armed Forces Day early, on Saturday, with a flag-raising ceremony, many celebrations on the high street, and a service led by Rev. Paul. I was pleased to see representatives of our local armed forces. Members of the Yorkshire Regiment, which largely serves my constituency, were there, although people in the north of my constituency might tend to join The Rifles, and we had representatives from our local cadet forces, including the Royal Marines Cadets, the Sea Cadets and the Royal Air Force Air Cadets, who are based in Norton, in my constituency. There were also representatives from the Royal Military Police Reserves, who I am proud to say are also based in Norton. Stockton has strong representation from the armed forces in our local community; I am pleased to say that one in 20 people in my constituency are either serving in the armed forces or veterans.
I mentioned the Royal Military Police. I wondered if they were not mentioned enough in the House, so I thought this would be a good opportunity to commend their work. They can claim to be the longest-established regiment or corps, with a history stretching all the way back to the 13th century and the appointment of the first sergeant of the peace. Today, they are a vital part of our armed forces, with around 2,200 soldiers and civilian staff. They support operations in conflict zones, peace- keeping missions and humanitarian efforts. This is perhaps a suitable moment to pay tribute to the hon. and gallant Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for her service as a captain in the Royal Military Police, and for her continued advocacy for the armed forces community.
The Royal Military Police are much like other skilled units in the armed forces, but they have three main roles: the policing of the Army, special investigations and close protection. In policing the Army, they will be attached to a unit in the field, and will ensure that captured members of enemy forces are treated appropriately, legally and humanely, which is clearly an important role. They were recently deployed in Ukraine as close protection for staff of the Foreign Office. There are airborne RMP, based in Colchester; they were part of Operation Market Garden at Pegasus Bridge.
David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)
I welcome what the hon. Gentleman is saying. Would he accept that the actions of the Royal Military Police attached to fighting units are a direct reflection of the Army and of our national character in upholding the rule of law even in warfare?
Chris McDonald
I would. I may go on to develop this point, but that role creates for members of the Royal Military Police a unique duty and a serious responsibility that puts them in a slightly different position from their comrades, which must be quite difficult. That is why I wanted to highlight the role of the RMP.
Members of the RMP can also find themselves in incredibly dangerous situations. A friend of mine, who is a member of the RMP reserves, highlighted to me the role of Royal Military Police officers during the second world war and in other conflicts in managing traffic points. Those fixed grid reference points are vital in managing the traffic flow of equipment and personnel appropriately for our logistics, but they also mean that RMP personnel are easy to target by artillery and aircraft. They carry out that role with great bravery; I commend them for that.
As I have mentioned, policing puts individuals in a difficult and unique position. That is also true for the civilian police force, but I think there is a particular additional burden on members of the Royal Military Police in how they discharge their duty. I was struck by the story of Royal Military Police veteran Kate Green, which she told 20 years after the lifting of the LGBT military ban. When she served in the Royal Military Police, the thing that she feared most was being asked to investigate those suspected of hiding their sexuality from the Army. If an LGBT serviceperson admitted their sexuality, they were out and that was the end of their military career. Eventually, Kate decided that she could not continue with her service anymore and that she did not want to continue to live a lie herself, so she handed in her one-year notice. The LGBT ban was lifted on 12 January 2000, just a short time after her career ended. Kate now works with the Royal British Legion and maintains a strong connection with the Army, despite no longer serving. This is an opportunity for us all to welcome the lifting of the LGBT ban and to recognise the service of LGBT veterans.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
Nearly 30 years ago, when I was at the University of Exeter, I argued vociferously to make sure that our armed forces were allowed to recruit from our campus and that they got people like us into the military, so that we could create a military that was receptive and reflective of our society, so that people from LGBTQ+ communities could serve alongside us, without any impediment. Does my hon. Friend agree that inclusion comes from being part of an institution and helps to change it from within, and that it is necessary that we do not put in place impediments to armed forces recruitment on campuses today?
Chris McDonald
I thank my hon. and gallant Friend for his service and his continued advocacy in this place for the armed forces. He spoke powerfully, and I agree with him. It is no small task to change the culture in an organisation; it starts and ends with leadership, so we must thank the leaders in our armed forces, who have done exactly as he said.
I will share the story of Rachel Webster. She is a Royal Military Police veteran from the north-east, and she is another example of how it is possible to break down barriers and overcome some really quite entrenched stereotypes. Rachel chose engineering over cookery when she was at school—that was her interest—but she was told that she would not be able to weld because she was a girl. I do not know if any hon. Members have ever had a go at welding, but I have; I am a boy, and I am terrible at it.
Rachel was unable to pursue welding at school, but, like me, she left school and joined British Steel. It was better at teaching her welding than it was at teaching me, because she took a four-year apprenticeship programme and learned how to weld. But her ambition was to enter the armed forces; she wished to join the Royal Engineers, where many of her compatriots on the British Steel apprentice scheme went, but when she applied she was told that women could not be in the Royal Engineers at that time.
Undeterred, Rachel joined the Royal Military Police in 1989. She trained with the Women’s Royal Army Corps, and then with the RMP, and she was deployed to Germany. Her career took her across the world, from Northern Ireland during the troubles to Afghanistan in 2001, but one of her proudest moments came in Iraq in 2003. She was helping to build a girls’ school and impressed the local men, who did not realise it was possible for women to weld—so she was able to use her welding skills on behalf of the Army.
Both Rachel and Kate have really powerful stories. They show us that courage does not know any gender or sexuality, and I hope that their stories will inspire my constituents in Stockton, Billingham and Norton and people across the country. Let me take this moment to very much thank all our armed forces—particularly the Royal Military Police and its reservists in my constituency, across the north-east and across the country—for their valuable service to our nation.
Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Roger Gale)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
It is an absolute privilege to speak in today’s debate on Armed Forces Day—a day on which we recognise and celebrate the bravery, dedication and sacrifice of those who serve and have served in our armed forces. We honour and thank them.
Earlier this week I was proud to attend the armed forces flag-raising ceremony in Epsom. Such events are held in communities across the country, and their meaning runs deep. They are a visible reminder of something that should never be taken for granted: the courage of the men and women who step up to defend our freedoms, often at great personal cost.
This week is personal for me, because I served in the British Army as part of the Royal Military Police, who vital operational work was quite rightly highlighted by the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). My journey began with the desire to lead, travel and make a difference. I joined Sandhurst, which was gruelling and inspiring in equal measure. As one of the few women there at the time, I trained in boots that were not designed for me, but I emerged with unbreakable friendships forged in resilience.
I was first deployed to Bosnia as part of NATO’s peacekeeping mission. Later, I served in Iraq with 1 Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment during Operation Telic 4, helping to retrain the Iraqi police force in a dangerous and volatile area. We operated under constant threat. A year before my arrival, six of my Royal Military Police colleagues were killed in Majar al-Kabir. I still remember the fear of that first night in Maysan, travelling in a blacked-out bus and unsure of what lay ahead; the fear of the unknown and of not making it home is one that many serving personnel still face today. We carried out our mission with professionalism and camaraderie—British troops working shoulder to shoulder with brave interpreters, local allies and international partners—but I saw at first hand how overstretched and under-equipped our troops often were compared with our allies. We got on with the job, but we should not have to make do.
Armed Forces Day is not just about parades and flypasts; it marks a time for action. Our service personnel deserve more than warm words. They deserve a fair deal. That is why I am calling for a fair deal commission to overhaul the conditions facing service personnel, veterans and their families. From housing to pay and from diversity to transition support, our service personnel deserve reform. Unfortunately, too many military families still live in substandard accommodation, too many veterans struggle with poor mental health and inadequate support, and too many LGBT+ veterans are still waiting for proper justice and compensation. We were pleased to see the Government accept the Etherton report’s recommendations, but speed is of the essence because many of those affected are elderly or seriously ill.
Women in the armed forces still face unacceptable levels of harassment and misogyny, as the Atherton report revealed. We must do better, and we will push for full implementation of those recommendations.
When it comes to troop numbers, the reality is stark: our armed forces are overstretched and under-resourced. We are calling for a new bonus scheme to help to bring into and keep more new recruits in the British Army, and the expansion of the current rejoining scheme to attract former soldiers to re-enlist.
I left the Army earlier than I planned. Like many servicewomen, I was forced to choose between motherhood and military service. There was no support, no nursery and no flexible career path. Those are the real barriers that drive people out of uniform, and the military lose many experienced people. We must change that. If we want to recruit and retain the best, we need to support families. The Liberal Democrats would create a one-stop shop for military families to access housing, education, healthcare and career support.
I am proud of my constituency’s military history. Langley Vale was once a world war one training camp for more than 8,000 soldiers, and it is now a place of reflection. Our local Royal Engineers, the 135 Geographic Squadron, recently celebrated 75 years of proud service, marching with bayonets fixed through Ewell.
In this volatile and uncertain time, let us honour the legacy of our service personnel not just in ceremony, but in policy. Let us make Armed Forces Day a starting point for serious change.
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
It is a great privilege to speak today to mark Armed Forces Day 2025—a moment for our country to show its deep and enduring gratitude to all the men and women who serve and have served in our armed forces. Their service underpins our national security, our values and our way of life. Whether it is on the frontline or behind the scenes, at home or abroad, those individuals commit themselves fully to something far greater than themselves, and they do so not for recognition but out of duty.
Since becoming the Member of Parliament for Mansfield, I have had the opportunity to meet veterans, serving personnel and their families. I have seen at first hand the strength of character, discipline and resilience that military life builds. It is clear that those who serve bring with them skills that enrich every part of our society once they return to civilian life, but we must be honest about the reality that many of them face after service.
By its very nature, military life is unique. It often means frequent moves, long separations from family and sudden transitions. Although the vast majority of veterans make successful moves into civilian life, there are still far too many who encounter disadvantage, whether in housing, employment, access to healthcare or mental health services and so forth.
Mr Calvin Bailey
I served for 25 years. At times—for almost 10 years at a stretch—I had month-on, month-off deployments, where I was away from my family. During this Armed Forces Week, we must remember, give praise to and celebrate our armed forces families, who, as my hon. Friend describes, suffer unseen pressure and burden.
Steve Yemm
I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. Certainly, when I speak to the families of serving personnel in Mansfield, that subject is always very close to the top of the conversation. It is very important to recognise those issues, and it is for those reasons that it is so important that we recognise the armed forces covenant—our collective promise across government, society and public services that those who serve should not be disadvantaged by virtue of their service. That is not just a principle; it is important that it be recognised in law, but the covenant can be effective only if those in positions of responsibility understand it and implement it properly.
That is why, earlier this month on 4 June, I was proud to host the first ever all-party parliamentary reception for the armed forces covenant here in Parliament. That event was held in partnership with the Royal British Legion and the Ministry of Defence’s covenant team, who do outstanding work to support veterans and promote awareness. I formally put on record in this House my thanks to the Royal British Legion, and to the Minister for Veterans and People for his attendance at that event. Its aim was really simple: to help Members of the House and their staff members better understand how the covenant operates and the support it provides, and how we can use it to serve our constituents more effectively. I found it very encouraging to see Members from across the House and across the political spectrum in attendance, absolutely united in their belief that no one who serves this country should face barriers when their service comes to an end.
Armed Forces Day and Armed Forces Week are not just about parades and flag-raising, important though those things are; they are really about recognising and reaffirming our commitment to the people who defend our freedom day after day. As we rightly thank our armed forces today, let us recommit ourselves in this House to ensuring that their support is matched by our support, that their sacrifice is never met with silence, and that their families are never left behind. Let us move forward on this day, not just with gratitude but with purpose.
David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)
It is an honour to speak today ahead of Armed Forces Day—a day not just of pageantry, as the hon. Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) said, but of principle. I congratulate the Government on reinstating the pageantry as well—it is a good thing. It is a day to recognise the men and women who serve, or who have served, in His Majesty’s armed forces: the quiet professionals who carry the weight of our security, often in silence and too often without thanks. As we have heard, we owe them and their families a debt of gratitude that we can never really pay, but gratitude alone is not enough. As the Minister said, only a quarter of veterans feel that their service is properly recognised, and there is a reason for that. I will speak plainly about it, and I hope the Minister will not take it as partisan. I hope he will take what I have to say, in what will be a difficult five minutes of listening for him, as a call for action and assistance—or, if he likes, a call for help.
As my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) said, there is a shadow that hangs over our armed forces: the political and legal vendetta targeting the veterans of Operation Banner in Northern Ireland. Those men answered their country’s call in one of our country’s darkest hours. Without hesitation, they stood between the innocent and the terrorists, often literally—they were often in the way of the bullets. Now, decades later, they are treated not as heroes but as suspects. The frankly inadequately informed inquest into the SAS-IRA conflict at Clonoe is just one incident in which elderly veterans are being persecuted; there will be many more.
We should never forget that terrorists killed 722 British soldiers during the troubles. The people who carried out those murders have effectively been exonerated by the British state. I do not blame the state for that—it was necessary at the time—but today, we witness a legal crusade against the men who risked everything in the service of peace. This is not justice; it is an attempt to rewrite history. It is prosecution driven by politics, not facts. While the killers walk free, authorities hound the soldiers who stopped them from killing and treat those soldiers like criminals. The legacy Act—forgive my shorthand —was designed to put an end to this travesty. For their own reasons, the Government have decided to repeal that Act, but if they do not properly replace it with effective legislation, they will hand the initiative back to those who spent decades glorifying violence. I hope the Minister will pay attention to every detail of the paragraph I have just spoken, because it is important.
The Government must decide whose side they are on in this exercise. Our veterans, who are now in their 70s or even older, deserve peace in retirement, not a knock on the door and questions about battles they fought to defend the public half a lifetime ago. Those battles were fought under orders, under supervision and under yellow card rules, and immediately afterwards, everybody faced close judicial examination of their behaviour to ensure they had obeyed the law in every respect. To refer back to the speech made by the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald), the military police were often involved in those investigations—it did not always make them popular, but it was a necessary part of the process. Not one of the conditions I have described applied to the psychopathic murderers those soldiers were up against.
I have repeatedly asked the Government to end this shameful campaign of retrospective injustice, and I will continue to ask until I get a meaningful answer and a resolution to this running sore of injustice. That is why I support the petition that my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford referred to, with its 145,000 signatures—an astonishing number in such a short time. However, this is just the start. This issue is not just massively important to our veterans; if this rewriting of history succeeds, this weapon of lawfare can be used against soldiers in any future conflict, destroying the effectiveness of our troops in future operations.
This morning’s edition of the Daily Mail carried a powerful headline announcing the start of a campaign to highlight that very problem. When we look at that headline, though, we should remember that this is not just about our special forces; it is about the whole of the armed forces. There are at least 20 inquests into actions by Government agencies and forces that could potentially be restarted by the Government after the end of the legacy legislation. Only a minority of those inquests are about special forces; most are about conventional forces, or about the Royal Ulster Constabulary or the Ulster Defence Regiment.
If we continue down this path, not only will we betray our past; we will jeopardise our future. This campaign of persecution sends a chilling message to the next generation: “Serve your country, risk your life, and face prosecution in your old age.” Why would any young man or woman sign up for that? The truth is that many will not. I know that the Minister referred to better recruitment and retention figures, but that will not last if this battle is lost by the British state.
This challenge has been most high-profile when it has struck at our elite units, such as the Special Air Service, the Special Boat Service and the Special Reconnaissance Regiment—the Det, as it was once known—but it applies to every rifleman, soldier and member of the military who carries and wields a weapon in defence of his country. Those soldiers, who operate in conditions of extreme danger and uncertainty, are required to make impossible decisions at great speed while under fire, or in terror of being under fire. They expect neither recognition nor reward, but just one thing: the support of their Government. We expect our soldiers to put their lives on the line for our country, but why would they do that if their country will abandon them after their service? Instead, they face doubt—doubt that creeps into the field, into the command and into mission planning.
If soldiers must weigh every trigger pull against a future court case, we cripple their ability to act. What is the point of the armed forces if we render them useless through legal ambiguity? I am the last person to tolerate unnecessary killing or misbehaviour by our troops. Those who were in the House at the time will know of my past campaigns on torture and rendition. I will not stand for that, but we must balance properly the rule of law as it applies to each environment. We already have thought-through rules of lawfare established in the Geneva convention, and that is where we must look first when conducting a war.
From 2005 to 2007, during the operations against al-Qaeda in Iraq, our military achieved, along with the Americans, spectacular results in saving lives. I reiterate that that was about saving lives. In Baghdad, the number of vehicle-borne suicide bombings fell from 100 a month to just one after we engaged. Sectarian assassinations—once rife—all but ceased, care of our military. That was not the work of indiscriminate bombing or division-level assaults; it was achieved through precise, controlled and surgical raids into some of the most hostile environments, generally by elite forces, and backed by careful planning.
The impact was staggering. Even a hostile “Panorama” programme showed that 95% of terrorist neutralisations were captures, not kills. That was under unbelievable circumstances, and thousands of innocent lives were saved. That was a matter not just of operational skill, but of moral discipline. In the midst of close-quarters combat against some of the most dangerous men on earth, our forces showed a restraint few could match.
I have no doubt that mistakes are made from time to time, and those should be answered for, but if we allow our opponents to use lawfare to destroy these capabilities, we are left with blunt instruments—the bomb, the missile and the drone—with which, instead of capturing or killing just the guilty, we kill every innocent civilian on a bus or every guest at a wedding party. Our military has been brilliant at doing the opposite—at being targeted, lawful and effective. Dismantling that capacity would be not only militarily reckless, but a betrayal of the principles that the Minister said we stand for, which distinguish us from those whom we fight.
Let us today do rather more than clap politely at a parade. Let us act. Let us end the relentless hounding of our veterans. Let us give our serving forces the legal protection and political support they deserve. Let us recognise that if we find it difficult to recruit, it is a consequence of a state that too often turns its back on its defenders. This Armed Forces Day, let us make one promise: that no British soldier will ever again be abandoned by the very nation they have so bravely protected.
Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab)
I rise to pay tribute to our armed forces personnel. May I associate myself with the Minister’s remarks? I start by recognising veterans for their past service and their contribution to society. They continue to serve society with their skills and leadership, shaped by their unique military experiences. I also thank our reservists for the extra time they give in supporting our armed forces, and I declare an interest, as I have a husband who is a reservist in the Army. I also thank our cadets and our armed forces families, who make sacrifices in their own way to keep us safe, which must be recognised.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
At the weekend, I attended the Royal British Legion Old Catton’s 90th birthday celebration, and I pay tribute to all the volunteers and community groups, as well as our armed forces and veterans. I met cadets from Constitution Hill, Aylsham Road and College Green in Norwich, and what they are learning is phenomenal. Does my hon. Friend agree that we have to back them with support and also back the many volunteers who help make those cadet groups run effectively?
Kirith Entwistle
My hon. Friend raises an important point. Our cadets provide a good opportunity for our young people, and they should be supported and backed as much as possible.
I am proud to have attended Monday’s flag-raising ceremony in Victoria Square, in my constituency of Bolton North East. I was proud to see the strong showing of support for our armed forces at that ceremony, where the armed forces flag was raised above Bolton town hall. It will fly there proudly until the end of Armed Forces Day on Saturday. The ceremony was an opportunity to reflect on those who have served and those who are currently serving, especially those deployed overseas and in active service. I was glad to join in celebrations with Jerry Mistry, president of the Royal Artillery Association’s Bolton branch, and also members of the Royal Artillery, such as Gunner Paul Brindle. There are nearly 3,000 veterans in Bolton North East, and Bolton is also home to the 216th Battery of the 103rd Regiment of the Royal Artillery, which is the most northerly sub-unit of the 103rd Regiment, with lineage dating back to 1889.
I am deeply proud of our local military history, but on Monday I also heard concerns from members of the 216th Battery about a lack of funding, particularly around general training, meaning that there is not enough money to progress training levels. I sincerely hope that the Government will look at ways to provide more support on that.
I am also a former employee of the Royal British Legion, and as someone with experience campaigning to improve the lives of our armed forces, I strongly welcome this Government’s commitment to renewing the nation’s contract with those who serve and those who have served. Having worked on raising awareness about the armed forces covenant, I am pleased that this Labour Government recognise its importance in supporting our armed forces communities and that we have committed to enacting it in law. However, what plans do the Minister and his Department have in place to ensure that sufficient funding and budget is in place to implement an extension of the armed forces covenant duty? How do the Government intend to work with different layers of local government and our regional mayors?
As a parent, I welcome plans to expand wraparound childcare to support families deployed overseas, and I was pleased to hear that they will now receive 20 hours a week of funded childcare, saving families around £3,400 a year. I strongly commend the Minister and this Government on broadening support to our armed forces families, because I have experienced at first hand how much they struggle and the unique challenges they face.
Olivia Bailey (Reading West and Mid Berkshire) (Lab)
On that point, there are many brave men and women in my constituency who are serving or who have served. I am proud of them and their families, and I thank them for their contribution this Armed Forces Week. My hon. Friend mentioned the Royal British Legion, and I wish to give particular thanks to Tilehurst Royal British Legion in my constituency. It does a fantastic job to support our veterans, particularly Christine Lewendon, the president of the Tilehurst branch. Will my hon. Friend join me in thanking them for all that they do?
Kirith Entwistle
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in that. We should pay tribute to the Royal British Legion, its branches and its teams, with all the various support that they provide to our armed forces community.
I am pleased to see that this Government are boosting cadet forces, creating opportunities for 42,000 young people by 2030, because I know how much of a difference that will make to people in my constituency. I also welcome the largest pay rise for the armed forces in more than 20 years, and I am deeply grateful that we are establishing an armed forces commissioner, which is long overdue.
Finally, I will end by reiterating the concerns highlighted by members of the 216th Battery around funding for training. I hope that the Government will look at more ways to provide more support so that we can continue to back up our words with action and help to upskill our vital defence sectors and our armed forces community. I look forward to joining in Armed Forces Day celebrations this Saturday.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
I want to speak in the debate today to recognise the contribution of all those who serve in our armed forces and those who stand beside them in support. It is Armed Forces Week, and I will be attending the Huntington Armed Forces Day on Saturday at Sapley playing fields. I pass on my appreciation to Anna Dutton for her efforts in organising the day from a standing start. I also thank Andy Phipps of Cambridgeshire army cadet force for his efforts.
For a region with strong links to the armed forces, it is wonderful that our armed forces personnel and families, both British and American, will have the opportunity to participate locally. I say that as an MP who is very proud to have military bases in his constituency, whether they are British with RAF Wyton, the home of UK defence intelligence, or RAF Molesworth and RAF Alconbury, which are both run by the US air force. We have an extraordinary number of US personnel in and around our villages, which always takes people by surprise when they hear those American accents.
Armed Forces Day is about the recognition and celebration of those young men and women who give up the best years of their lives to serve their nation in a uniform. It is also about those who stand behind them, who sacrifice their time, their careers and their ability to make a home in order to support their partners, mothers and fathers to realise their career ambitions.
I spent the best part of a decade in the Army. Although I rarely, if ever, mention it, it was one of the greatest experiences of my life, particularly now that, through the passage of time, I have all but forgotten how bad some of it actually was. But I did love it, and I do miss it. The camaraderie, the experiences and the opportunities are all unique elements that make being a part of the armed forces so special. You forge bonds with those who serve alongside you, and the unspoken shared experiences allow you to meet a fellow veteran and bond over a shared love of spinning dits. Sadly, it would be inappropriate in this place to recount most of those dits, if not all.
I served in the armed forces during the highest tempo of kinetic operations since the Korean war. It placed a strain on our armed forces, the likes of which we have not seen since. I know that those on the Labour Benches often like to recall that the last time we spent 2.5% of GDP on defence was under the last Labour Government, and the PM even mentioned it in his statement earlier today. What they do not often mention is that that operational tempo just about broke the Army.
I echo the words of the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire): in my experience of serving during the same period, we went through kit and equipment very quickly. With the pace of change that we currently see on operations and in warfare, we would do well to remember—I know the Minister is listening—that we cycled through different types of body armour. In a four-year period, I think we had three different types of body armour and three different types of helmet. We changed our entire camouflage pattern, and we had to bring in urgent operational requests to have vehicles that could withstand roadside bombs. We went from patrolling in berets and enhanced combat body armour in Iraq to patrolling in helmets, and with metal detectors, in Afghanistan only a couple of years later. The pace of change is something that we must consider.
Alice Macdonald
I hesitate to interrupt what is a marvellous speech and a great testament to the hon. Gentleman’s service, but he mentioned the urgent request for vehicles that could withstand roadside bombs. I thought this might be an appropriate moment to mention that, in response to that, a new type of steel was developed in the UK: ballistic steel, which was invented at the University of Cambridge, developed at our steel research institutes and produced in south Wales. That was a great national response, and it demonstrates the importance of not only our steel industry, but our industry in general, in providing a rapid response to the requirements of those in the field.
Ben Obese-Jecty
I concur. Although I do not know anything about the detail of that steel and the armour it provided, it is worth bearing in mind the pace of change and our ability to react. We have heard a lot of talk in recent weeks about the capability that we intend to buy, but we have to remember the old adage, which is so true: no plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. That is probably truer now than it has been for many a year.
We take our armed forces for granted. Although the jingoistic applause, the veterans’ discounts and the “Thank you for your service” is not for us—it is too gauche; we are, after all, British—the flip side is that there is certainly some middle ground to be occupied. We need greater societal recognition of the value of serving and an inculcation that service to one’s nation is something to be proud of, something to aspire to, and something that benefits not just the country, but the individual.
We too often look to our armed forces as a default civil emergency force and the first port of call. If there is flooding, we ask them to deliver sandbags. If it is snowing, we ask them to clear the runway at Heathrow. If firefighters go on strike, we ask our armed forces to man the fire trucks. We also ask them to provide security at the Olympics. Even the bin strikes saw the Army brought in to help. Although I appreciate that there is a specific process by which the help of the armed forces is enlisted, I wince whenever I see it activated. We should not need to rely upon a force of barely 100,000 or so available service personnel to cover everything. They should not be the default bailout for Government or local government ineffectiveness.
Our armed forces deserve better. They deserve to be paid properly, so that they do not have to take a pay cut when they are deployed on operations, as was recently explained to me by some of the personnel on NATO operations in Poland; to be housed properly, so that defence contractors do not paint over the mould on the walls because treating it is not on the contractors’ checklist, as I have been informed is happening in service family accommodation in my constituency at the moment; to be posted sympathetically, so that families do not end up split apart if both parents are serving personnel, as I have seen happen to my good friends who are still serving; and to be supported and granted stability, so that service personnel’s children can receive a stable home and education.
I could go on, but the point I am making is that the treatment of our service personnel is not good enough. Frankly, it was not good enough when I served, it was not good enough under the last Government, and I do not think it is good enough now. While I do not doubt the Government’s sentiment, I retain little confidence that the situation will drastically improve, despite the promises. We in this House often stand in this Chamber and wax lyrical about our armed forces, recounting stories of their bravery, courage, commitment and sacrifice. But they are more than just a backdrop for an announcement, and I encourage those of us in this House to remember that.
I will make one light-hearted final point. As we Members of Parliament return to our constituencies this weekend to participate dutifully on Saturday and attend the events and parades, spare a thought for those young men and women. As much as I am sure that they value and appreciate the recognition—I remember this well from my own Army experience—the irony is that the best way we could show how much we value them is by not making them work on a sunny Saturday afternoon in June.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
It is with immense pride that I rise today in Armed Forces Week, particularly as the national celebrations are returning to Cleethorpes this weekend. That will be a moment of real honour for our community in Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, nearly 10 years after the last time we hosted such an event, in 2016—and my, hasn’t a lot happened in those years? To have it return under a Labour Government is an incredibly proud moment.
My constituency may not have garrison towns such as those that my colleagues represent, but our ties to the military run deep and proud. From American GIs camped in Grimsby’s People’s park during the second world war, to the brave men and women who gave everything to their country to support the war effort— including our towns’ fishermen, as well as my great-grandma May and my great aunt Kathleen, who both took roles as wartime wardens in their village of Healing—our towns have long stood shoulder to shoulder with our armed forces.
Those connections continue today, with the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Anglian Regiment, a reserve battalion, operating out of Westward Ho in Grimsby, and training and serving with distinction across our area and further afield. Their commitment really does reflect the values that define our area: resilience, solidarity and service. Every Remembrance Sunday, they open their doors to the whole of the local community in order to provide refreshments to the young cadets—the hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) just mentioned cadets—who will be out parading this Sunday.
Mr Calvin Bailey
We must be very proud of our cadets. I was a cadet myself, and it kept me on the straight and narrow and out of trouble. In my constituency I have two amazing squadrons: 12F, based in Waltham Forest and Leyton; and 241, the best air cadet squadron in the country. Behind them is a corps of volunteers who really do not get the recognition they deserve, and it is really important that we recognise the people who prop up these organisations in our community. Will my hon. Friend join me in recognising their service and commitment?
Melanie Onn
My hon. Friend makes an important point. Members have said today that we will not have a future pipeline of young people who want to participate in the armed forces, who already have the training and the discipline, and who understand the lifestyle if we do not have the adults who are prepared to give up their time to support that. It is incredibly time-consuming and takes them away from their families, and it really does show a commitment not only to young people, but to their communities and the armed forces more widely.
Sarah Dyke
I, too, participated in my school’s combined cadet service, and we enjoyed many evenings and nights on Salisbury plain in the bitter cold—in fact, they were some of the coldest nights I have ever experienced. Glastonbury and Street sea cadets give youngsters an experience that helps them grow into the people they want to be, in a safe and friendly environment. It gives them confidence, friendship and leadership skills to help them launch well into life. Will the hon. Lady join me in celebrating groups such as Glastonbury and Street sea cadets, and thank them for all the amazing work they do?
Melanie Onn
I am very happy to do as the hon. Lady asks. All the organisations working with young people do an amazing job. The fact that the young people involved show up and commit themselves is testament to their resilience, and to their belief that they can achieve. They are putting time and effort into preparing themselves for their future.
The Westward Ho barracks opens its doors to our local community every year, providing hot food and drinks. It is a place for families to come to, and for everyone to get together and reflect on the day. It provides a little bit of community spirit, connection and conversation on a very important day in our constituency. We regularly see hundreds of people lining the streets as the procession goes from the minster to the memorial near the Grimsby Institute.
This year, as Cleethorpes hosts the national Armed Forces Day event—I do not want to keep saying it, but we are hosting the national event this year, and are very pleased to do so—we will be celebrating not only our nation’s servicemen and women, but the economic and cultural boost that the event will bring to our area. I have to pay tribute to our local armed forces events team. They are volunteers, and they work tirelessly at any event related to our armed forces. They are always there, and they will be working incredibly hard right down to the wire. I am absolutely sure that they will not have the opportunity to enjoy any of the events on Saturday, because they will be so busy making sure that everything is running smoothly, and that those participating and coming from outside the area to make this a grand celebration have everything they need. It will be a moment for our businesses and our tourism sector. Above all, it is about our people, and we will welcome those from around the country who will come to this national event and line the streets to give thanks to our servicemen and women.
Only recently, I had the pleasure of welcoming students from the uniformed services course at Grimsby Institute, who came into Parliament and the education centre. These young people are preparing for careers across the police, the fire service, the armed forces and the emergency response services. Their enthusiasm and discipline were a reminder that the future of our uniformed services is in good hands. They are the next chapter in our proud tradition of service, and I was very pleased to have them here.
We also have some excellent community groups. The armed forces events team have turned an old local authority building called the Knoll into a centre for signposting for veterans. It provides signposting for any kind of mental health support, housing support, or welfare and benefits advice. It is a really nice, relaxed environment, with space for veterans to have a coffee, and there are professionals to signpost them and provide additional support.
We have another brilliant grassroots group called NEL4Heroes, which is run voluntarily by ex-servicemen and women. It brings people together through food and drink, and other activities, and it really helps people who have left the services—sometimes recently, sometimes many years ago—who are finding life a little bit difficult or find themselves in a challenging situation. There is a pride that comes with service, but sometimes that pride means that people do not wish to access the help available to them. NEL4Heroes is a brilliant group that informally builds relationships and ties, and provides support. It encourages people not to feel embarrassed about requiring additional support for a period of time, and it helps them to access it. I congratulate the group on that work.
Our town’s military history runs deep and has lasting connections to our European allies. After the second world war, the Carpathian Lancers, a Polish regiment unable to return home due to the Soviet occupation, made Weelsby Woods their home. In their honour, a plaque and a wooden sculpture of their bear mascot, Wojtek, stands in the park as a tribute to their service and to the many who settled in Grimsby in 1947. I wanted to mention that, because when I was growing up, my great aunt and her mother, my great-grandmother, welcomed into their house one of those Polish servicemen, so I grew up with him, and he lived as a lodger with our family for 50 years until he passed away. I want to remember Michek Włodarczak, because he was a big part of our family’s life. I am sorry—
John Slinger
In my hon. Friend’s very powerful and moving speech, she has spoken about the efforts of the entire community. The right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) talked about the importance of the national endeavour to remember those who have served, and those who continue to serve, irrespective of party. In that spirit, I would like to put on record that former Conservative councillor Kathryn Lawrence is doing wonderful work with her team at the Hillmorton branch of the Royal British Legion. I have met her many times and worked with her, and will continue to do so. Indeed, I will be taking part in the ceremony on Saturday. It is in that spirit that we should support our armed services.
Melanie Onn
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, which was particularly timely. There are people who play a big part in our life at different periods; I know that my family are not alone in feeling that.
It would be remiss of me not to pause and remember the Grimsby Chums, the ordinary men from our community who volunteered together, trained together and, in July 1916, faced the horrors of the Somme together. As part of the 101st Brigade in the 34th Division, they stood shoulder to shoulder with battalions from Edinburgh as they launched the first wave of the British assault. At 7.28 am, the Chums advanced into what would become a day of unimaginable loss. Some managed to reach the German trenches, including Second Lieutenant Harold P. Hendin, who, with just five men, reached the enemy’s reserve trench and held out under relentless counter-attack. Of the battalion, 502 fell that day—15 officers and 487 from other ranks—with only two officers returning uninjured and barely 100 men left standing. Their bravery and sacrifice are an enduring legacy of our community’s contribution to peace and freedom.
Our losses are not just from that time. Over the last two decades, we have had a number of other losses from our community, such as Flight Lieutenant Smith, Marine Lance Corporal Ford, Trooper Pearson, Guardsman Major and Sergeant Telford, who should also be recognised.
In that vein, I welcome the commitments from the Government that show their determination to improve the lives and welfare of military serving personnel and their families, and particularly the forces accommodation improvements. Having lived in service accommodation, I can confirm the difference that it makes to have a good-quality home. The properties of some of my friends were not in such a good state. They were bringing up children, but were having to keep on top of some pretty terrible structural issues while their partners or husbands were away on service.
I also acknowledge the additional funds for homeless veterans, which will be invaluable for ex-servicemen and women who become homeless after struggling to adjust and make changes later in their life, and who perhaps feel that their community is not as strong as it was when they were in the forces. Making sure that we have the precision funding to support them is incredibly important.
This weekend, as the Red Arrows fly over Cleethorpes beach, hopefully I can share an ice cream with the Secretary of State, or perhaps a pint; there will be lots of pints drunk this weekend. As our community celebrates with parades and displays of remembrance, we will feel a fierce pride in our past and present, and a sense of unwavering support for our armed services. I know that I speak for everybody in Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes when I say thank you to those who served, who serve now, and who are preparing to serve. Their bravery and sacrifice is written into the soul of our nation, and into the streets, homes and families of our communities. Let us honour them, not just on Saturday, but through the values we champion, the support we offer, and the remembrance we preserve for generations to come.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
There are many gallant Members in this Chamber, in the Scottish Parliament Chamber back home in Scotland, and in other legislatures of these islands, both national and local—Members who have served in the armed forces with distinction and bravery. I pay tribute to them, and to those family and many friends who have served, and in some cases continue to serve. I hold them in the highest regard for their commitment to protecting the freedoms that we hold dear. That commitment is demonstrated by every rank and in every location where our armed forces operate.
Scotland has a very proud and distinguished military history. Armed Forces Day has become a further focal point of community support for our serving armed forces and our veterans. In my constituency of Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, there are around 4,500 serving personnel—around 3,000 at RAF Lossiemouth and around 1,500 Army personnel between 39 Engineers at Kinloss and the 3rd Battalion, Royal Regiment of Scotland, the Black Watch, based at Fort George. They are supported by hundreds of Ministry of Defence civilians and military contractors, such as Boeing and BAE Systems, who jointly, with our serving personnel, deliver significant defensive and offensive capabilities for our military system. In addition, there are around 12,000 veterans in my constituency; I believe we have the highest percentage of any constituency in the UK. That reflects the north of Scotland’s very long and distinguished connection with the military. Once we add in immediate family, around one in five people living in Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey have a direct military connection—quite some figure.
It is unsurprising, therefore, that the armed forces in the area are not viewed as a separate or distinct community, but rather as a significant and integrated part of the wider community. As is often the case in the north of Scotland, there is no fanfare, but rather an everyday respect and appreciation of the role of the armed forces embedded in community life. Frankly, it is something that just is. That is important. There is no “us and them”; we are a whole community.
That does not, of course, equate to the armed forces being ignored, as can be readily observed from the significant numbers that turn out, year on year, across the constituency to witness acts of remembrance. I am very pleased that those numbers have grown over the last 25 years very significantly, and show no sign of dropping off. There are military children in most schools in the constituency, and some schools have a very significant percentage of military children. Military charities are well supported in the region, including SSAFA, the RAF Benevolent Fund, Help for Heroes, and Erskine Veterans Charity, which fairly recently opened a very welcoming and well-attended facility in Forres that is providing fantastic support to veterans. They can get together for a chat, or for the more extensive support that Erskine can provide.
The military, including contractors, offers a fantastic range of opportunities to young people in the region, and many take up those opportunities. In my pre-parliamentary life, I spent some four years as leader of Moray council. During that period, we strengthened our role in delivering the armed forces covenant. We worked cross party and across the chamber in the council to do that. That has continued, with cross-party support, and the council achieved the gold standard in the employer recognition scheme. During my time as council leader, I was very pleased to support the developing civic link between the council and HMS Spey, a Royal Navy river class offshore patrol vessel currently operating in the Indo-Pacific, giving the constituency and the wider region really strong links with all three services.
I will touch on some politics. I trust this will be taken in the positive spirit in which I present it. This is not a day for hard politics, but there are some things that could be better for our armed forces. First, on the covenant —I mentioned this earlier to the Minister—I very much welcome proposals to embed the covenant in legislation. There will, no doubt, be challenges associated with that, and financial implications, but it is, in my view, the right thing to do. I look forward to future opportunities to debate embedding the covenant in law.
Secondly, one thing that frustrated me in my council days was comparatively rapid changes in numbers, notably at RAF Lossiemouth, which happened with no financial support to the council. Many councils with military bases, particularly air force bases, are in rural areas with small populations and consequently smaller budgets to operate with. That makes them less agile, because they simply do not have the money available at short notice to make the changes required to deliver services at a bigger scale. Other Members will, I am certain, have similar experiences in areas with significant changes in military numbers. If the MOD were a private developer, it would be contributing substantial sums to support growth in childcare, education and health provision, and a range of other public services. It would also be required to invest in infrastructure, such as improved roads and junctions in the area. The current design of our armed forces and the Government Departments that support them does not lend itself to doing that. This needs serious work.
I am by no means a fan of everything that the US does, but in this regard when significant changes occur to military-related populations there, there is a Government Department that steps up for a period to support local authorities, including with finance, to help smooth changes, with investment in service provision and the local economy. Councils and health boards have to absorb big bumps in demand, and that is frequently easier said than done. We have a welcome opportunity to fix that.
The Department in the US is called the Office of Local Defence Community Co-operation. It used to be known as the Office of Economic Adjustment, but I think that perhaps sounded a bit Orwellian. I would welcome further opportunities to debate this issue to see what progress can be achieved. The team in the US describes its role as helping communities to navigate the impact of Department of Defence actions and programme changes. That is exactly what we need to achieve in the UK, and it is particularly important as we move into an era of significantly increased spend on our armed forces and growth in our base numbers. There will be demand for more dentists, doctors, teachers and wraparound childcare. That puts a lot of pressure on local services and we need to navigate our way through that.
Before I conclude my contribution, I would like to make three specific mentions. First, like a number of Members who have contributed to this debate, I am taking part in the armed forces parliamentary scheme—in my case, the RAF course—which has afforded me many excellent learning opportunities that enable me as a parliamentarian to better understand our armed forces and to more effectively represent constituents with connections to our armed forces. I pay tribute to the Armed Forces Parliamentary Trust, which is behind the excellent scheme, and the military officers who support the scheme here in Parliament, who have given so much time and effort to ensure that the scheme is the effective learning tool for MPs that it is. I commend the scheme to other Members who may be interested in taking it up.
Secondly, it was a real delight to give my constituent Evie Skinner a tour of Parliament earlier this week and to congratulate her in person for her well-deserved win in the Month of the Military Child poetry and art competition, set up by the excellent charity Never Such Innocence. Evie, who has a parent serving in our armed forces, should be really proud of her art piece on the theme of “Memories”, and I hope she and her family enjoyed their time in Westminster.
Finally, this morning, I was pleased to welcome to Parliament several members of the Battlefield Co-ordination Detachment with their associated ground liaison officers, who are based with 1 (Fighter) Squadron at RAF Lossiemouth. The group was led by Lieutenant Colonel Gee Jenner and Captain Ant Butler, who, alongside their colleagues, are developing their understanding of the role of Parliament and the interaction between Parliament and our military services. Achieving that mutual learning is as important to the military as it is to parliamentarians.
It is vital that we continue to support and celebrate the dedication and commitment of our armed forces, and Armed Forces Day affords us the opportunity to do just that.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I associate myself with the Minister’s opening words.
It is a privilege to speak in this debate as both a member of the armed forces parliamentary scheme and the proud Member of Parliament for Portsmouth North, the home of the Royal Navy and a community with deep historic ties to our armed forces. However, for me, this debate is not just about duty—it is personal. I have a son currently serving, as well as several cousins and, indeed, a grandad who wear and wore their uniforms with pride. Like those in so many military families, I know both the pride and sacrifice that service life brings. I have proudly stood on the shoreline waving off ships as they sail out of my city and sail back in—and yes, it is emotional. I thank the Minister for joining me last month as we waved loved ones off on the Prince of Wales. I will be returning again next month.
This Armed Forces Week, we honour not just those in uniform—regulars, reserves and veterans—but the families who stand behind them. Our armed forces are the backbone of our national security, and they are the very best of us. I want to make special mention of the 14th and 15th Battalions and the 16th (Reserve) Battalion, more fondly known in my city as the “Pompey Pals”, and to remember the more than 1,400 who have lost their lives, many going over the top in the battle of the Somme on 3 September 1916. A tribute to the armed forces veterans who did not survive can be found at my football club; their names also adorned our football shirts one season.
After years of neglect and underfunding, I am proud that this Labour Government are turning the page. We delivered the largest pay rise in more than 20 years for our armed forces and, as we heard from the Minister, we are increasing recruitment and have committed £1.5 billion more for military accommodation, tackling years of decay and poor conditions that too many forces families have had to endure. I am proud to have brought the Minister for Veterans and People to Portsmouth to meet residents and armed forces families and to see what can be done with accommodation, and I look forward to this Government changing homes for the better.
We must also look to the future and at boosting the cadet forces, which I am pleased we are looking to increase by 30% by 2030, opening doors to 42,000 more young people from every background to develop the skills, discipline and confidence that service life can bring. I want to mention the Royal Navy Cadets, Royal Marine Cadets, Sea Cadets, Army Cadet Force, Air Cadets and Combined Cadet Force, as well as the teachers at City of Portsmouth college who teach the uniformed protective services BTEC levels 2 and 3, and who do a great job showing our young people that there can be a life in the military.
To ensure those who have served are not forgotten, we are launching Valour, a £50 million programme creating a nationwide network of veteran support centres. I urge Portsmouth city council to sign up to and wholeheartedly embrace this programme, as we have veterans who deserve and need our support. I also look forward to putting the covenant into law and promoting this service to our armed forces and their families, many of whom do not know it exists, so that we can follow best practice across the country and deliver for our people.
We proudly commemorated VE Day in Portsmouth, where it was fantastic to join the residents of Knox Road at their street party. I look forward to joining many other street parties on VJ Day in August.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
We owe a huge debt of thanks to the whole of the world war two generation, but I would like to pay special tribute to a remarkable local hero from my constituency, Jack Dark, the last surviving member of the Pathfinder squadron. The Pathfinders played a crucial role in world war two, flying ahead of bomber formations to mark targets for attack. To say it was a tough mission is an understatement: Pathfinder crews survived for an average of just six weeks. Against all the odds, Jack will celebrate his 102nd birthday on 11 August—an extraordinary milestone that speaks to his incredible spirit and determination. I am very much looking forward to meeting Jack in person tomorrow, and I hope the hon. Lady will agree that his story is a powerful reminder of the bravery and resilience of all our armed forces.
Amanda Martin
I thank the hon. Member for that wonderful intervention and send my best wishes to Jack for his birthday. In remembering that, I would also like to remember John Jenkins—one of our very own veterans from Portsmouth.
In Portsmouth, we also proudly celebrated Armed Forces Day last Saturday, honouring the service and sacrifice of our military community with events across the city. It is a day that I have attended since I was a kid, and it shows our city at its very best. On Monday, we raised the armed forces flag—a visible sign of our respect and support for those who serve and have served—but in my city the armed forces are remembered every day, not just on one day.
I also want to pay tribute to the local charities, veterans’ organisations and community groups in Portsmouth, which work year round to support our armed forces communities. Their dedication and compassion make a real difference. It has been a pleasure to work with them since coming to this place on behalf of my constituents, veterans and their families, and I have been proud to host many of them in this place.
Let us use this week not just to show gratitude, but to rebuild the bond between society and those who serve, and to ensure that our armed forces community is properly respected, supported and championed. Let us also use it to say thank you: to my Olly, to Kate, to Craig, to Kirstin, to Mark and to Jonty, who is currently away on the Prince of Wales—and, indeed, to all who serve and have served. Whether they are serving now, have served or are supporting from home, they all deserve nothing less than our full commitment on their return.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
I welcome the Minister’s opening speech; as a member of the Defence Committee, I look forward to scrutinising the detail of his remarks.
I wish to say a brief word of thanks to the Royal Marines Association, the Royal British Legion, SSAFA, the Veterans Charity and many others that all do good work in my constituency of North Devon, which is home to more than 4,800 veterans across more than 11% of the households. Obviously, North Devon is also home to the Royal Marines Barracks Chivenor and the Commando Logistic Regiment, and has the Royal Marines, the Navy and the Army all stationed there.
Back in January, I spent a day with a wonderful organisation called the Root Cause Project—a community of veterans and serving personnel who meet regularly around the camp fire in the great outdoors of North Devon to look out for each other and to talk. Their message is simple: being able to talk to people with shared life experience is vital to those who have served in uniform, and is good for their mental health.
I know from my time working for SSAFA, the Armed Forces charity, just how important that support structure is. When I left the Royal Air Force in the 1990s, many veterans still found the experience of being out of uniform not just strange but very isolating. I hope that Armed Forces Week continues to bolster our forces community, and shows that we all appreciate the service of those who keep us safe.
Recently, I visited the British Normandy Memorial with fellow parliamentarians, including some in the Chamber today, to lay wreaths in memory of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice. It was a truly moving experience. Officially opened on 6 June 2021 by His Majesty the King as royal patron of the Normandy Memorial Trust, the memorial stands as a powerful tribute to the 22,442 servicemen and women under British command, who lost their lives on D-day and throughout the battle of Normandy in the summer of 1944. I was extremely honoured to meet a veteran of the D-day landings who had just turned 100 years old. He told me that, on that day, he had landed on the beach seven times. When I asked him why, he said it was because he was the pilot of one of the crafts. I thanked him for his service and he recited some memories from that momentous day.
Walking among the stone inscriptions, I was struck by how the memorial brings together the names of individuals from over 30 different countries, all united in sacrifice. Set on a hillside overlooking Gold beach, the site offers a poignant reminder of the scale and diversity of those who fought and fell. That day certainly put a large lump in my throat, just as every remembrance service does.
We recognise that dedication to duty this Armed Forces Week. Most importantly, I hope that veterans and serving personnel know that a support structure is there for them and that they will never be alone.
Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his opening remarks, and I thank colleagues across the Chamber for coming together to commemorate and celebrate the brave men and women who keep us safe.
Before I begin, I note that a Westminster Hall debate was due to take place at around the same time today on the RAF Photographic Reconnaissance Unit, whose intelligence-gathering work of taking a staggering 26 million photographs was vital to the war effort. These men, often unarmed, operated at extreme risk, with a tragic 48% fatality rate. Their bravery and sacrifice was instrumental to our victory. I hope to contribute to that debate when it takes place so that we can rightly honour their role in protecting our freedom.
On Armed Forces Day, I want to focus on the women and men currently protecting our country. Many colleagues have spoken about the uncertain global times that we face. These challenges serve only to sharpen our focus and strengthen our resolve to honour our armed forces.
I have previously shared with the House that while I grew up knowing that my grandfather and great-grandfather had served in the war, I rarely saw their contributions recognised. Armed Forces Day is about changing that. It is about raising the flag for all those on active duty, thanking them for their service, and honouring their decision to put themselves in harm’s way for the rest of us. I take this opportunity to thank the men and women of Ilford whose names are etched in Memorial Hall, which used to be the entrance to the maternity unit of King George hospital in Newbury Park. It is a wonderful idea that they gave their lives so that babies could be born in freedom.
Armed Forces Day is about recognising our armed forces who come from every walk of life and from diverse faiths and backgrounds. Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, black, white and Asian—each individual making an incredible contribution to our collective security. If we are serious about supporting our armed forces, we must do more than hold debates to observe commemorative days. We must improve the experience of those serving now, so I am proud of the Prime Minister’s announcement of increased funding today. Improved experience means supporting efforts to make the military more inclusive, more accessible and more responsive to the needs of its personnel.
Groups such as the Defence Sikh Network are doing just that by raising the voices of Sikhs in service and working to ensure that they can serve with dignity and authenticity. In 2022, the Defence Sikh Network spearheaded the introduction of a waterproof, tearproof, camouflage copy of the Nitnem Gutka—a sacred Sikh prayer book—for use in tactical environments. This initiative revived a tradition first seen in world war one, when Sikh soldiers who served under the British Indian Army carried their scriptures with them into battle. For many Sikhs, their decision to join the military is rooted in their faith—in the Sikh principle of protecting those more vulnerable than them. The introduction of these Gutke helped serving Sikhs to maintain the connection between their faith and their duty.
It was not always like that. What comes to mind is the story of a young Oxford graduate, Hardit Singh Malik, in 1916. He was denied entry into the British Royal Flying Corps; he was going to join the French, until his tutor intervened and got him a special dispensation. He flew with great distinction. He fought against the Red Baron and, coming back, survived for 40 miles at low altitude with two bullets in his leg, his plane being shot at more than 400 times. As he himself said,
“My pursuers just did not have the bullet with my name on it.”
These small but meaningful initiatives about the Gutka are made not just on Armed Forces Day but on ordinary days, demonstrating respect for those who serve. On Armed Forces Day, we commemorate the men and women whom we may not see daily—the ones behind the scenes who work tirelessly to keep us safe, like the people in the Plessey factory in Ilford in world war two. We honour those whose names are not always remembered, whose records are lost, like those of the men of the RAF Photographic Reconnaissance Unit, and we reaffirm our commitment to implementing real change. From larger-scale policy initiatives to smaller cultural initiatives, we must make our forces stronger and more inclusive.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
Rather fittingly, this debate comes in the shadow of the NATO summit at The Hague yesterday, with its headline pledge for defence spending to reach 5% of GDP by the midpoint of the next decade. I echo remarks from across the House about how we live in an increasingly volatile world —perhaps more volatile and more unpredictable than at any other point in the post-1945 era of pax Europaea and pax Americana.
We see the bloodiest conflict on European soil since the second world war and death and devastation in the middle east and across Africa, Asia and beyond. In comfort on civvy street, we are perhaps sometimes guilty of forgetting how fragile our freedoms and democracy are, and we forget the threats posed to them. Our values are not guaranteed; they have to be fought for, and we must be reminded of that. We live in an age that is the historical exception, not the norm. Our way of life at home depends on our strength to defend it and how we project ourselves abroad.
We recently celebrated the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe. Just a few generations back, still within the memories of many, this country was engaged in a fight for its very life and survival. We would do well to remember that always. Thankfully, the brave men and women who serve today need no such reminder.
I come from a military family. My late father served in the Royal Naval Reserve. Two of my three brothers have had long careers in His Majesty’s armed forces. Ben is a brigadier in what I still insist on calling the Black Watch. As officer command in Scotland when the late Queen died, he was in charge of making sure that everything went smoothly; I cannot tell you how proud I was of my baby brother Ben when it did. Johnny, now retired, was a lieutenant colonel in the Grenadier Guards. They have dedicated their lives to the service of our country. I assure everybody that their example, and that of every soldier, sailor and airperson, reinforces my knowledge that our military remains in the best of hands. I say, perhaps with a shred of bias, that Britain’s armed forces are still the finest in the world.
I speak with additional pride about my constituency of Tiverton and Minehead, which is home to 4,577 veterans. It is a proud part of the country with a strong military tradition. I take this opportunity to salute the fantastic presence of the Royal British Legion and other veteran organisations in my patch, particularly the wonderful Dunkirk Memorial House at the foot of the Quantock hills and the armed forces breakfast clubs in Minehead and Bishops Lydeard, which provide a sense of community.
Having done lots of pro bono work with the Royal British Legion in a previous life, particularly on PTSD and hearing loss, this is a topic very close to my heart. I am delighted to hear the Minister announce that the armed forces covenant will be included in legislation. It is a national obligation to look after those who have served us. Before I was elected, I had to try and help young RAF veteran Owein and his family, including his young daughter, Autumn, who had just been diagnosed with autism. They had become homeless. If only that legislation had been in place then. I know that my colleague, Councillor Claudette Harrower, who is responsible for the covenant at Mid Devon district council, will endeavour to make sure that the very best has been done. The armed forces covenant is not charity; it is justice.
We must be alive to the recruitment crisis currently bedevilling our armed forces. We must close that gap. I fear, however, that we are not overly helping ourselves in this regard. Allow me to draw attention to the plight of a young constituent of mine, which I suspect is a frustratingly similar story to that of a number of young people up and down the country. In February 2024, she gave up the chance to study A-levels to attend the Lichfield assessment centre, where, in October 2024, she passed the assessment with scores that were exemplary and such that she was accepted into the Intelligence Corps. However, by June of this year—some 16 months later—she still has not been given a start date, and just receives occasional holding communications from military authorities. Meanwhile, she gets by with a series of menial part-time jobs, but has seemingly been left in the lurch by her Army recruiters.
I am not using her name because she has asked me not to, but I will give the Minister her details later in the hope that we can process this matter sooner rather than later. Young people like my constituent, who are prepared to serve their country and so represent the best of their generation, deserve better. Will the Minister comment on that privately? Will the Minister also commit to publishing detailed targets for processing applications, allocating sufficient personnel to the recruitment pipeline and providing all successful candidates with a concrete start date within a reasonable time period?
I want to put on the record that the Veterans Minister was known as a legend when he served in the Royal Marines and, to me, he remains a legend. I can send him an email and receive his response within 48 hours, which is enormously helpful to my constituents, who are the people I serve.
In finishing, I refer to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who said that he was a patriot, but not a nationalist. As I finish my speech, I reiterate his words: I speak as a proud patriot, but never, ever a nationalist.
David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
It is both a pleasure and a privilege to close today’s excellent debate on Armed Forces Day. I pay tribute to colleagues across the House for their thoughtful and passionate contributions. I rise on behalf of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition to express our sincere thanks to all those who serve and have served in our armed forces—regulars, reservists, veterans and cadets—and to the families who support them every step of the way.
Armed Forces Week, which began on Monday and culminates this Saturday, 28 June, with Armed Forces Day, is a national moment to say one thing clearly and collectively: thank you. Thank you to those defending the UK and our interests around the world. Our armed forces represent the very best of our country: committed, courageous and professional. They work tirelessly, often in the most challenging conditions, to keep us safe and uphold the values that we share. Today’s debate has been particularly powerful because of the personal reflections shared by so many right hon. and hon. Members.
The hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) represents a strong military constituency—one in 20 serves, or has served, in the military. Having watched the hon. Gentleman in defence debates, it is clear to me that he is a passionate advocate for his constituency, with strong military links. He talked about the Royal Military Police, a regiment that plays a vital role that we need to hear more about. I enjoyed hearing about the airborne police officer unit—an interesting skillset that we could potentially see in the Met. He also talked powerfully about his constituents Kate and Rachel, veterans who faced internal adversity because of their gender and sexuality. As he said, rightly, courage does not know any gender or sexuality.
The hon. Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) talked strongly about the skills that military people bring to civilian life. Having seen many veterans in my constituency make that transition, I know how many skills they bring. He advocated for more support for them to make that transition, and mentioned the real need for the armed forces covenant to be strengthened. I was glad to hear about the reception he held here recently in support of the covenant, and it would be good to support him in future such endeavours. We must ensure that the sacrifices made by our service personnel are never met with silence, as he says, but with real lasting commitment and action.
I agree with my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis) that gratitude for service is not enough on its own. Only a quarter of veterans believe that service is valued, and I completely agree that that needs to change. He spoke powerfully about Northern Ireland veterans, especially the Special Air Service, a regiment in which he served. He spoke about the injustice that group of special forces soldiers, and others in the military, face from the opening up of domestic legal frameworks. Those veterans were in battles that were fought under orders, under the yellow card legal system and under the view of the Royal Military Police. There were strong legal frameworks surrounding those operations, and my right hon. Friend made the point that those veterans joined up and served our country, but the view is now that they can be prosecuted in later life. That is not right, and I look forward to the issue being debated later this month and, I hope, overturned. The petition on the subject is currently live, and there has been a significant uptick in the numbers signing it in the last few hours.
The hon. Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle) made remarks about her personal connection to the armed forces, and her husband’s service in the reserves. It was interesting to hear about the 216 Royal Artillery regiment in her constituency and her link to the Royal British Legion. She made a powerful case for greater support for training, and I look forward to the Minister’s response to it. I also echo her support for expanding the cadet programme. I spent many happy years in the air cadets, and I see what value they bring to society and as a pathway for people to join the military. I align myself with her comments.
My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) was, as ever, a strong advocate and champion for the military units in his constituency. We regularly hear him calling for more support. He served the UK in operations during the global war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq, and he knows first hand the challenges that come from the evolution of war and the need for kit to keep pace with the evolution of threats. As he rightly said, no plan survives first contact with the enemy, and those words remain as true today as they have ever been. It is crucial that we not only learn the lessons of modern conflicts, but ensure that our armed forces retain a broad range of capabilities to meet the demands of the evolving environments that we may be involved with in the coming years. My hon. Friend also made the fair and timely observation that making our armed forces work on a hot Saturday in late June is perhaps not the best way to honour them.
The hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) rightly highlighted the volunteers who work tirelessly behind the scenes to ensure that our armed forces are commemorated properly. They often miss out on enjoying the events themselves, so I hope that they will find time to relax and enjoy some sunshine with their families. We thank all of them and their grassroots groups for their vital support for these commemorations. She also shared a moving story about her great-aunt and mother, which touched many of us in the Chamber. They welcomed Polish servicemen into their home and they became part of their family nearly 50 years ago, demonstrating how service personnel become deeply woven into our communities and lives. As always, I am sure the Red Arrows will deliver a magnificent display over Cleethorpes this weekend. I hope that she manages to enjoy an ice cream—and hopefully a few beers, too—with the Secretary of State when he is in her constituency this weekend.
The hon. Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) is the proud mother of serving Royal Navy sailor, Olly, whom she has spoken about many times. She represents a city with a high number of service personnel and veterans—one of the highest in the country—and one of the homes of the Royal Navy. I say that as a Devon MP, and standing opposite the Minister, who represents Devonport. She also raised an interesting point around the protective services BTEC course. I have seen the value of that at first hand in my constituency at Bicton college, and it is interesting to see young people flourish in that environment. Again, just like the cadets, it provides a strong pathway for those who want to go into the military or other protective services.
The hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome), again, represents a strong military constituency—4,800 veterans and 11% of households. He has long been a proud advocate for the Royal Marines, with the Commando Logistic Regiment in his constituency. I was impressed to hear about the work he has done with SSAFA, the armed forces charity. It was enjoyable and interesting to go away with him recently on the trip he spoke about to Normandy to see the D-day commemoration. It was particularly poignant to meet the D-day veteran Norman Ashford, who is 100 years old. He was a Royal Marine and, as the hon. Member said, made countless trips up and down on to the beaches that day. I had a great deal of respect for him when I met him and heard his stories.
The hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) spoke about the RAF photographic units—tales of derring-do. It is a unit that I have enjoyed learning about as the campaign has been growing, and I look forward to that debate being rescheduled and brought back to the House. He made some interesting points about the contributions of people from all over the world, including the Commonwealth, to our armed forces, and the need to celebrate them this Armed Forces Day. It was interesting to hear about Hardit Malik, the first Indian fighter pilot in world war one with the Royal Flying Corps, fighting against the famous German Red Baron.
Lastly, my near neighbour in the south-west, the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour), has a strong military family, and I have spoken to her many times about her brother’s service. She raises an interesting and important point about the pathway for people who want to join the military. She talked about her constituent trying to join the Intelligence Corps and the waiting time to join being far too long. It would be interesting to discuss whether something can be done to provide concrete start dates.
I, too, speak from personal experience. I am proud to have served in the Royal Marines, and after leaving regular service a decade ago, I was fortunate to continue as a Royal Marine reservist with the Royal Navy parachute display team. It was—to say the least—one of the more unconventional side-gigs in public service, giving me a literal bird’s eye view of Armed Forces Day celebrations. Over several years, I had the privilege of parachuting into national Armed Forces Day events in Guildford, Cleethorpes and Llandudno. From thousands of feet above, seeing the crowds gathered to show their support was genuinely humbling. Although I will admit that, at that height, my primary concern was not so much national pride as avoiding crash-landing into someone’s picnic.
Those kinds of events are not just pageantry, as Members from across the House have said today; they are powerful tools for engagement and recruitment. I have vivid childhood memories of attending large air shows and other military displays, but one personal favourite, and one that I am sure many hon. Members attended, was the royal tournament at Earl’s Court here in London. The Navy’s high-octane field gun competition and the Royal Signals’ famous White Helmets motorcycle display team made a lasting impression on me, and without doubt helped shape my decision to join the military.
As defence spending rises, and as difficult choices are made to support that increase, it will be more important than ever to showcase our armed forces and their capabilities. That visibility ensures public understanding and accountability for where taxpayers’ money is spent.
There is also a broader point. As the national security strategy outlined this week, the threats we face are serious. The possibility of a hostile attack on the UK, which for many decades was seen as unimaginable, is now again within the realm of possibility. A time may come when we must once more defend the things that we hold dear. We must therefore forge a renewed relationship with defence—not seeing it just as a line in the Budget, but recognising it as a fundamental pillar of our national security and resilience.
Armed Forces Day is about more than capability; it is about morale. It is about recognising the extraordinary service of our sailors, soldiers and aviators. Public support matters, as it lifts spirits, strengthens bonds and reminds those in uniform that their country stands firmly behind them. That support must go further than symbolic gestures, as we have heard repeatedly in today’s debate.
The armed forces covenant is a solemn pledge—a year-round commitment from Government, businesses and communities to treat those who serve, and their families, with fairness and respect in everyday life. The message from today’s debate is clear: gratitude must be backed up by action on housing, employment and a dignified transition to civilian life. These are responsibilities we all share.
The Government’s strategic defence review rightly proposes a whole-of-society approach to national defence. It is welcome, and it is necessary. Defence is not just the task of our armed forces; it is a shared civic responsibility. True resilience relies not only on military capability, but on strong institutions, cohesive communities and national unity.
At the heart of that resilience is trust—a social contract between the nation and those who serve it. We must do all we can to honour that trust, which is why we cannot ignore the serious concerns raised by veterans, especially those who served in Northern Ireland. The strength of feeling in that community is real and justified. My right hon. Friend the Member for Goole and Pocklington mentioned that in his speech.
I place on record my thanks to the Minister for Veterans and People, the hon. Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), for his principled support for a judicial review of the Clonoe inquest, and I hope his judgment is actively being sought by his colleagues in the Northern Ireland Office, especially as they reflect on their plans to repeal the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. Our veterans deserve clarity, compassion and fairness.
The strength of the Royal Navy, the British Army and the Royal Air Force lies not just in firepower or training, but in the character of those who serve. Their dedication, discipline and selflessness are a credit to our country. So let us use this Armed Forces Week not only to reflect, but to renew our commitments to serve those who serve us, to honour those who have worn the uniform, and to ensure that future generations understand the debt we owe.
We are grateful. We are proud. We will remember them. We will support them. And we will thank them.
Luke Pollard
Members who had to sit through my opening remarks will be pleased to know that I will not be repeating many of them, but I am keen to pick up on a number of points raised in their speeches, which were so ably summarised by the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East (David Reed). I thank hon. Members for their contributions. At a time when it is easy to take political pot-shots across the Chamber on serious issues, today’s debate has shown that we can come together, cross-party, to support our people, to have a serious debate about the contribution our armed forces make to our national security, and to raise genuine issues of concern with respect and thoughtfulness. Sadly, not as many people will be watching this debate as watch other proceedings in the Chamber, but if did, they would see Parliament working effectively and properly.
Mr Francois
In a bipartisan spirit, perhaps the Minister will allow me to relay a brief apology. I promised the Chair of the Defence Committee that I would explain why he and some of the Committee are not here, when ordinarily they would be. They are on an overseas trip directly related to defence business. It would help keep me honest if the Minister allowed me to place that on the record.
Luke Pollard
The right hon. Gentleman certainly does not want to offend the Chair of the Defence Committee, so I am glad that he has had the chance to put that on the record.
What I heard in the debate, and what I hope our forces will have heard if they were listening, was not only support for the men and women who serve, and advocacy for the armed forces as a brilliant career choice, but support for improvement to the transition from military life to civilian roles, and support for those who have served in the past; we heard stories of heroism and courage. That makes for a good debate, and I am pleased that a number of Members were able to pick out elements from the strategic defence review. The Government have adopted all 62 recommendations from Lord George Robertson’s report, and we will implement them in full. Further announcements will be made about what we are implementing and how we are taking forward not only the SDR’s recommendations, but its spirit.
As we set a path for increasing defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by April 2027, to 3% in the next Parliament, and to 3.5% by 2035, and for spending 1.5% on resilience and homeland defence over in the same period, I hope there will be plenty of opportunity for Members to make the case that increased defence spending can mean spending not just on kit and equipment, but on our people. I expect that to be heard loud and clear across the House, so that when we hear conversations about renewing military accommodation, we know that there is an increased budget to pay for that work, and when we talk about valuing our people, we know there are above-inflation pay rises for them for the first time in a very long time. That is important.
There is one thing that I will expect to see and hear more about in future debates. We heard lots of mentions of our Army, Navy and Air Force and their traditional roles, but in future debates on the armed forces, I expect that we will hear more mentions of those who work in cyber and the digital defence of our nation. The cyber direct entry pathway that we have opened has been a success, and we look forward to announcing the passing out of the first cohort later this year. The ability for us —the armed forces and people who care about defence—to talk about cyber resilience and protecting our digital infrastructure is just as important as protecting against kinetic and more traditional military threats. Indeed, I expect that in future years there will be more discussion of how we keep our space domain safe.
I am glad that a number of hon. Members were able to talk about their role and participation in the armed forces parliamentary scheme. I am the Minister responsible for that, and I am proud of the way that the scheme has been expanded in the past year. I thank the Armed Forces Parliamentary Trust for its support on that. The scheme is a superb opportunity for parliamentarians who have not served, and for those who have, to experience a different perspective on military life. It allows them to understand what we ask of our people; to listen and learn from them, their deployments and their experiences; and to bring that into the House and improve our work here.
I turn to comments made in the debate. I am glad that the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), talked about the Forcer protocol. Indeed, I expect all Members of the House to ask their chief constables whether their police force is going with that. I undertake to do the same for Devon and Cornwall police, as will many of the other Devon MPs, I imagine. There is a real merit in the protocol, so I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for bringing it to the House’s attention.
I am proud to be Plymouth’s first ever out MP, and seeing the way that LGBT personnel and veterans are now spoken about in the House fills me with pride. When I was growing up, there were not always the role models or the public debate that enabled folk like me to feel that there was a place in the armed forces for them. The remarks made by my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) and others were very powerful. He said that courage knows no gender or sexuality, which is absolutely right. We need to build that sentiment into our armed forces as we seek to change the culture, so that everyone is welcome and there is no place for abuse. As we move to warfighting readiness, we need the contribution of people from every background to our armed forces if we are to keep our nation safe.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for talking about the importance of payments to LGBT veterans. The priority order was established by the Minister for Veterans and People. The initial payments have gone to those over 80 and those who are sadly towards the end of their life, so that we can ensure that those payments are made before they leave this place. We have now established the procedure for paying the larger cohort of people who do not fit into that category, and the Minister for Veterans and People will make further announcements about how we will roll out the payments. We are pleased that the first payments have been made in full to the first cohort.
I agree with the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell that Armed Forces Day is a starting point for serious change. I believe that change started on 4 July last year, but I take her comments in the spirit in which she made them. It is not enough to talk about change; we have to take action. Hopefully, she and Members from across the House will see the strategic defence review being implemented, the increase in defence spending, the increased pay for our forces, and the housing improvement, all of which will contribute to improvement.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm), who spoke about the armed forces covenant being our collective promise, which is exactly right. As we look to put that fully into law, there will need to be a conversation. If I may be cheeky, Madam Deputy Speaker, I point out to right hon. and hon. Members of all parties that questions on our armed forces covenant need not be directed only to the Ministry of Defence. If the covenant is to be effective, we need every Government Department to understand their role in putting the covenant fully into law. The Minister for Veterans and People has been undertaking cross-Government work on that, and I imagine that there will be further such work in due course, as we build towards that legislation.
Mr Francois
In the hope that other Government Departments are listening, the Minister might recall that I said in my remarks that at noon today the Northern Ireland veterans petition had just over 145,000 signatures. I looked a few seconds ago, and the figure is now just shy of 148,000. Perhaps people were inspired by the excellent speech by my right hon. Friend the Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis). Will the Minister convey to his colleagues in the Northern Ireland Office that we do not want to throw our Northern Ireland veterans to the wolves—and clearly, from this petition, neither do the public?
Luke Pollard
I will return to the right hon. Gentleman’s speech, so he will not have to wait long for my response, but first I will deal with some other points.
I am grateful for the speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) about the national Armed Forces Day event, which I am pleased to see back. She has a passion for the event and is serious about her community. She also has pride in and a close connection to the folk she mentioned—it was a very powerful speech. I am certain that the ice cream will be on the Secretary of State, especially now that he knows he is going to the event, so she should expect plenty of dairy coming her way.
I thank the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter), who spoke about RAF Lossiemouth, the importance of how we base our people and valuing the wider community. I am grateful to him for mentioning HMS Spey; the offshore patrol vessel is doing a superb job in the Indo-Pacific, as is her sister ship HMS Tamar. Their contributions to upholding the international rules-based order and supporting our allies in the region are really important. She is a little ship with a big impact and is really very powerful there, so I am grateful for his comments.
I encourage the hon. Gentleman not to forget the opportunity to talk about resilience spending. He talked about the spending of other Government Departments and councils effectively enabling homeland defence. That is precisely why the spending pledge agreed at the NATO summit was that by 2035, 1.5% of GDP should be spent on homeland defence and other activities that bolster our resilience as a nation. I think he has a strong case to argue on that. NATO will shortly publish the full criteria, setting out what money will come into that, but I believe that the examples he gave are good ones to use in arguing his case, so I encourage him to do that.
My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) and I did indeed wave off HMS Prince of Wales when she left for her deployment to the Indo-Pacific. That was a good opportunity to meet members of her community in Portsmouth. The carrier and the carrier strike group include people from all parts of our country, who are all sailing together, alongside many of our allies, including our Norwegian friends, who have a frigate sailing on the entire deployment. When we celebrate the contribution of our armed forces, let us remember the contribution of our allies to keeping us safe today and in the past.
I am very grateful for the intervention from the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), who spoke about Jack Dark’s 102nd birthday. I am also grateful for the remarks from the hon. Member for North Devon (Ian Roome), who spoke about Norman Ashford, a D-day veteran. It is really important that we value and take extra care of those final few folks from the second world war. We must ensure that we capture their stories and retell them, so that they are not forgotten. I am grateful for the contributions of all of them.
My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) correctly raised the issue of the RAF photographic reconnaissance aircraft. I can report that the Minister for Veterans has indeed met those involved in the campaign, as I suspect nearly every single person in the House has. If there were a public affairs award for best lobbying campaign, this campaign would certainly deserve it. I understand that progress is being made, and that the campaign group met Westminster city council to discuss the issue. The cost of what is being suggested would need to be met by public subscription, and I have no doubt that it would be, so I expect positive progress. There is strong support for recognition of the bravery of the people who undertook these roles in the second world war, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue. I am also grateful to him for giving examples of service personnel who, in recollections of wartime stories, do not always get the attention that they deserve, including those from the Sikh community, who he spoke about.
It is good to have three Front-Bench speakers from Devon; that does not always happen in this place. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour), who spoke about the contribution that her family made. On the issue of the time of flight, as it is referred to in the Ministry of Defence, that is the time from signing up to attending a training establishment. We inherited a situation in which that time was over a year for some of our services, and that is not acceptable. In July last year, we were losing 84% of people in the process, not because of medical problems or eligibility issues around nationality or criminal records, but simply because the process took too long. That is not acceptable.
I am strongly against the criticism made that our younger generation do not want to serve our nation, because that is not true. Last year, 165,000 people tried to join the British Army, and we hired 9,500 at the end. We lost the vast majority because the process is too long and slow. That is why we are reducing the time of flight. I am very happy to look into the casework matter that the hon. Lady raised if she writes to me. The “10 and 30” policy that I mentioned in my opening remarks should certainly make a difference when rolled out fully across all three services. I will certainly try to discourage the Minister for Veterans and People from reading the transcript of this debate; being regarded as a legend will no doubt boost his humbleness.
I am also grateful to the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East for his concluding remarks, and for his story of nearly crash-landing in someone’s picnic. He did not tell the end of that story, but as he is here in one piece, let us assume that it all went well. I am also grateful for the way in which he summarised the debate.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle) raised valid questions from 216 Battery about training levels. We have inherited a situation in which training—for both regular and reserve forces—was often the first casualty of trying to manage in-year budget pressures over a number of years. We are very aware of that within the Ministry of Defence. We are conscious that the increase in defence spend could, in part, make a difference to that, but as we have a number of challenges to deal with, we need to look at the best way of delivering increased training—particularly adventurous training, which is what many of our forces want. I would be very happy to have a further conversation with my hon. Friend, so that she can raise with me the particulars of those issues.
The hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty), between making his speech and coming back, has changed his tie to look more like mine—I am very grateful for that fashion change. His remarks, particularly about the contribution of the US air force bases in his constituency, were a good reminder of the close friendship we have. I was at the US embassy earlier today as part of a conference organised by the Council on Geostrategy, looking at our transatlantic alliance. Our military-to-military co-operation underscores the value of our relationship with our US friends, and I know that America really does value the bases in the UK that it is able to operate from.
I entirely agree with the hon. Member for Huntingdon that our armed forces personnel should be paid properly, housed properly, posted sympathetically and granted stability. That is the intent of many of the changes we are making. On the stability point, I am thinking in particular about where we are with British Army deployments, because Air Force and Navy personnel generally have greater stability than their compatriots in the Army. We are aware of that issue and are looking at it, but I am certain that the hon. Member will be sending me lots of parliamentary questions—possibly before I have even sat down.
Let me turn to the very serious issue raised by the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis), who spoke about Northern Ireland veterans. He will know—because we have spoken about it a number of times, and he has also spoken with the Secretary of State and the Minister for Veterans—that we on the Government Benches feel very strongly that we need to support our veterans. We are seeking to navigate through that process at the moment. The debate on the petition mentioned by a number of Members will take place on 14 July. I welcome that debate, which will be an opportunity to make the case for those people who served our nation in support of peace in Northern Ireland.
There is more work to be done in this area. After the right hon. Gentleman made his speech, I read the article in the Daily Mail about the launch of the campaign that he referenced. It is certainly true that the Government seek to repeal the current Northern Ireland legacy Act, but what one has to get to the penultimate paragraph of the article to read is that we intend to replace it as well. The right hon. Gentleman chose his wording carefully about how that replacement needs to work.
The current Act is unlawful—it has been found to be so in a number of courts—and it has not prevented some of the things we are seeing at the moment, so we have to find a way forward in this area. The Northern Ireland Office is looking at it at the moment, and we in the Ministry of Defence continue to have conversations with our NIO colleagues—indeed, I think that was the point that the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford, was making in his intervention —and we will continue to do so.
Chris McDonald
Coming, as I do, from a constituency in the north-east, let me say that members of our community, of course, served in Northern Ireland for many years, so the issue of Northern Ireland veterans is just as important to those of us on the Government Benches as it is across the whole House. I was in the House on 21 May when the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland said that the Government came into office committed to remedying the failure of the legacy Act. That gave great assurance to me, and I am sure it gave great assurance to veterans in my constituency. Does the Minister agree with the Secretary of State’s comments?
Luke Pollard
I entirely agree—there is something that is not right, and it needs to be resolved. I do not doubt the passion that Opposition Members, and indeed those on the Government Benches, feel about this issue. I share that passion. We need to find a solution to this issue that can provide peace of mind as well as the ability to address community concerns. There is a path through, but we need to go carefully to make sure that we are cognisant of all the strong views, but I am certain that will happen. I am also certain that we will continue our conversations outside the Chamber as we work with Northern Ireland Office colleagues, who have the lead in this policy space. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington for raising the issue in this debate.
This has been a good debate for Armed Forces Day. Support comes not just from the Members who can speak in this debate; I am conscious that a number of Members present have been unable to speak, due to the vagaries of parliamentary procedure, including my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell, Wishaw and Carluke (Pamela Nash), who sits behind me as the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State. She is attending Armed Forces Day events at the Motherwell United Services club on Saturday. My hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough and Rushden (Gen Kitchen) was the Whip on the Government Benches earlier, and I am conscious that there are Whips on both sides of the House who might not be able to contribute verbally, but who I am certain will be supporting Armed Forces Day events in their constituencies across the country.
We need to ensure that the warm words and well-crafted speeches we have heard today are put into action all year round. It is not enough to have a day where we celebrate our armed forces; we need to recognise their service each and every day. As the nation sees an increasingly uncertain and dangerous world on their TV screens and on their phones, it is the men and women of our armed forces who are at the pointy end of the defence of our nation, but we can all do something to increase the resilience of our defence.
If everyone in the House updated the operating systems on their computers and phones, Britain would be more cyber-secure than it was beforehand. We all can do something. In this place in particular, Members of Parliament from all parts of the House can continue to make the case for our people, for defence families, for investment, for better pay and for better equipment for our forces. That is this Government’s intent, and from the sentiments I have heard from all parts of the House today, we can see that has cross-party support. I thank all hon. and right hon. Members for their contributions, and I wish everyone a successful Armed Forces Day on Saturday.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Armed Forces Day.
Floating Solar Panels
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I am delighted to see the House so full for this Adjournment debate. I want hon. Members who are staying to remember who was here. Indeed, people in the Public Gallery might wish to make a note in their diary, too, because I hope that I will in some way blow the House’s mind with what I am about to say and sow a seed that will grow into something fantastic. What we are here to discuss is floating solar.
Members will know that I am the Member of Parliament for Spelthorne. I feel obliged to remind the House on regular occasions that Spelthorne is not in Lancashire or in Lincolnshire. It is everything south of Heathrow until one gets to the River Thames. Hon. Members from around the House know my constituency well, because it is what they see when they take off from or land at Heathrow airport.
I was selected as the candidate for Spelthorne four days into the general election campaign. Having spent 25 years in the Army, obviously I love a map. There is a very good saying, “If you don’t understand what is going on, get a bigger map.” When I looked at a map of Spelthorne, I was struck by these four massive blocks of blue, so I looked into them. They are four raised reservoirs, which hold half of London’s drinking water. Being a practical person, I first thought to myself, “Well, there are not many votes there!” Secondly, I thought, “I cannot really build any houses there.” Spelthorne is 67% green belt and water, and a large chunk of the rest of it is floodplain, so it is difficult to know what we might do to meet our housing targets; people get crammed into the small islands where development can happen.
I was determined, though, to find some way to utilise the 2,000 acres of raised reservoir in my Spelthorne constituency. I looked into it a little further, and came upon the concept of floating solar. This is a terribly simple concept: simply take solar panels, attach them to plastic floats, anchor those floats to the bottom of the reservoir, and string some wires to take an alternating current from the floating solar panels. The clever bits, in terms of intellectual property, are the anchors—because, as I am sure hon. Members know, the depth of reservoirs tends to vary by about 1 metre from time to time. Equally, reservoirs are drained and reassessed on a rolling cycle of about 20 years.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
I thank my hon. and gallant Friend for allowing me to intervene. We are told that there is nothing new under the sun, but he is describing something that ticks both boxes—it is quite remarkable. I learned much about reservoirs from playing by the side of the scenic Penwhirn reservoir, outside by home town of Stranraer. I also learned about them in geography classes at Stranraer academy, and it strikes me that one of the reasons that reservoir levels rise and fall is to do with evaporation, and water is obviously a precious resource. Does covering reservoirs help to combat evaporation?
Lincoln Jopp
My hon. Friend pre-empts one of the many benefits of floating solar that I will highlight to the House. He remembers his physics highers well, because the placing of floating solar reduces evaporation from the body that is covered by 70%. Given that the vast majority of the water in our reservoirs is lost through evaporation every year, we will save a great deal more water if the Government decide to pursue this technology at a grand scale.
Part of my coming here today is to speak to two large constituencies within this House. There are 543 constituencies that contain reservoirs or man-made water sources. Similarly, countless Members from across the House have very difficult decisions to make about putting solar farms on good agricultural land. Essentially, what has happened is that the whole discussion in this area has become a zero-sum game. It is a battle between food security and energy security, and there has seemed to be no way of unpicking that—until now.
Globally, floating solar has been put to practical application at large scale in China, India and Vietnam. The UK was formerly a leader in this space, because on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir in 2016, a grand technology demonstrator was put on and plugged in, and it has been banging out 6.3 MW into Thames Water’s water treatment facility ever since. That is enough to power 2,000 homes. Given that floating solar covers less than 10% of that reservoir, I am sure that hon. Members can see the vast potential.
I want to talk about some of the benefits of floating solar, because they are legion. First, as hon. Members will have worked out already, there is the removal of the opportunity cost of putting floating solar panels on grade A agricultural land. If we do not have to put them all over Lincolnshire and we can put them on reservoirs, that land can be used for growing food.
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
My hon. and gallant Friend is talking about the use of prime agricultural land, and food security is part of national security, as is energy security and, indeed, water security. However, there is a huge trend of prime agricultural land being devoted to solar plants, including in my constituency of Epping Forest, where a new plan is about to go in for a 237-acre plot between Thornwood and Epping Upland. He is articulating alternatives for the placing of solar panels, and there are plenty of such places up and down the land—brownfield sites, reservoirs, railway sidings, rooftops of agricultural buildings—so does he agree that we must protect prime farmland and the green belt, and make sure that solar panels go in the right places?
Lincoln Jopp
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. I hope we are going to give hope across the House and therefore across the country that this alternative solution to putting solar panels on grade A agricultural land is, to a certain extent, an answer to a maiden’s prayers. Not only does floating solar remove the opportunity costs of putting it on agricultural land, but one of its beauties is that it is twice as efficient as a land-based system. Land-based systems warm up because they are on the land, and as they warm up they become less efficient, whereas floating solar panels, because of the evaporative effect on the underside, remain automatically cool and 100% efficient throughout a sunny day.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
As the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) is not here, unusually, perhaps I can fill in for him. We have already heard from one of my Essex colleagues, my hon. Friend the Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), about the controversy in Essex over a number of solar farm developments on land. Before the 2010 boundary changes, I had a very large reservoir in my constituency at West Hanningfield, which would be ideal for the technology my hon. and gallant Friend is suggesting. Does he not believe that many hundreds of other reservoirs across the country would be so suited?
Lincoln Jopp
I do, indeed. I was not 100% sure which Minister would respond to this debate, so I have had only the briefest of moments to look at the lake in Burgess park in the Minister’s Peckham constituency to see whether that may be suitable for floating solar.
We have talked about the opportunity costs and about doubling efficiency. I am sure hon. Members will have worked this out, but the 2,000 acres of reservoir in my Spelthorne constituency are raised, which means no one can see the top of them unless they are flying off to Torremolinos or landing from Dubai. Therefore, there would be none of the visual vandalism that people object to so much, and the carpeting of our beautiful country in solar panels would go away too.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
I must declare that I share an office with my hon. and gallant Friend, so I know an awful lot about floating solar because he is so passionate about it. As a result, I would point out that Grafham water in my Huntingdon constituency is the eighth largest reservoir in the country by volume and the third biggest by area. It is also a raised reservoir, but, ironically, it is surrounded by solar panels to generate electricity that we can see from the ground. He obviously agrees with me that it would be a fantastic idea to use that enormous stretch of water for some floating solar.
Lincoln Jopp
I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend for joining this merry band of evangelists for floating solar, and for seeking to get in on the ground floor with the inclusion of the reservoir in his constituency. Within minutes, he is immediately seeing the opportunity, and I congratulate him on that.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
I am really happy to join this debate, which is not only amusing, but very educational. For me, it is a matter of great concern for this country to conserve the water supply we have. Does the hon. Member therefore agree with me that floating solar stops the evaporation of water because it avoids direct sunlight hitting the water, and that it also conserves water?
Lincoln Jopp
The hon. Member, with whom I serve on the Defence Committee, makes a very important point about future-proofing the United Kingdom’s water supply from increased temperatures. In Australia, I understand that reservoirs are being covered at great expense to reduce evaporation. He might know that where floating solar panels exist, they reduce evaporation by 70. In the case of the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir, that is 100 tonnes of water a day. It is absolutely extraordinary.
I know Members are thinking, “Well, Lincoln, it couldn’t get any better,” but I have to tell the House that there are still some further benefits. [Hon. Members: “More!”] Where reservoirs are owned by water companies and the water companies want to use the electricity themselves, there is no requirement for planning permission. When we consider the turmoil that land-based systems have to go through over many, many years, and the paroxysms the nation puts itself through before it puts in a land-based system, we should note that floating solar can be deployed within a few weeks.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
This is another issue where the Conservatives can perhaps give more information to those on the Government Benches. We have real issues in many parts of rural Britain with the energy infrastructure that has to go alongside solar farms—for example, the massive mega-pylons in East Anglia. If the energy can be used onsite or if there is existing energy infrastructure, as there often is around reservoirs due to hydro and other factors, that is another great reason why floating solar is a solution that everyone can get on board with.
Lincoln Jopp
My hon. Friend makes a fantastic point. The Queen Mary reservoir in my constituency has a plug-in point to the national grid at one end of it. The ability to minimise the disruption that is caused by placing solar farms away from where the power is needed is certainly a consideration that plays into this.
Hon. Members will think, “Well, that must be his list complete. Those must be all the benefits of floating solar, because there can’t be any more.” But I say to the House that one of the most astonishing things about floating solar is that it improves the water quality underneath, as it is denuded of light and heat. There are things that grow in the water which the water companies subsequently have to filter out to make it tap-ready for us and our constituents. The water companies have to use fewer filtrants where the surface has been covered by floating solar. We have covered the evaporative effect, so I think I have made the case for floating solar.
Mr Francois
My hon. Friend makes a strong point about being able to use floating solar to obviate the need for development on green-belt land in other parts of the country. Is he aware that a development has been proposed by Bloor Homes at Dollymans Farm in my constituency for up to 1,300 houses, which is a major issue in the ongoing by-election in Wickford Park? Does he agree that to prevent the housing at Dollymans Farm, people should vote for the excellent Conservative candidate, Lewis Hooper, before the polls close tonight?
Lincoln Jopp
We have gone from Cooper to Hooper! I am delighted to follow my right hon. and gallant Friend’s endorsement, and wish everyone there the opportunity to get to the polls today to exercise their democratic right.
John Cooper
I am very grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend for giving way a second time. I do wonder if I may have stumbled across another advantage to floating solar, which may not have occurred to him. If water quality is improved, will that not help the fish? Clatteringshaws loch reservoir in my constituency has some of the best pike fishing in the country. I wonder if the fish might benefit from having a roof over their heads.
Lincoln Jopp
On Tuesday, I visited the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir, which is a closed site owned by Thames Water. I am not aware that there were any fish there, but there was certainly bird life. It is important to make the point that the general planning norm and all the modelling have been based on covering only 15% of these reservoirs, in order to leave sufficient space for leisure use, including fishing, no doubt, and for bird life. The birds I saw on the Queen Elizabeth II on Tuesday were warming themselves very happily on the floating solar panels, because, of course, by being on the panels, they are predator free, as nothing can attack them there.
“How big could this be?”, I hear the House roar.
Lincoln Jopp
I thank my hon. Friend for that.
The installed base of every single solar panel in the United Kingdom is producing 17 GW. If we were to cover 15% of man-made reservoirs in this country, we would double the national capacity, adding a further 16 GW without touching an inch of agricultural land. That is absolutely extraordinary. In so doing, we would create 80,000 jobs in the construction phase and 8,000 jobs in the maintenance phase.
My plea to the Minister—who I know is putting the finishing touches to the Government’s solar road map—is that floating solar should play a much greater part in the final road map than it did in the first draft. I am grateful to my right hon. and hon. Friends for their support; I hope this debate has been educational and informative, and that they are now fully signed up to the floating solar brethren and sisterhood, which will go forth from this place and evangelise for the good cause.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Miatta Fahnbulleh)
I thank the hon. and gallant Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) for securing a debate on this important issue and for prosecuting his case for floating solar with such flourish. I also wish to put on the record that the Minister for Energy, my hon. Friend the Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks), was desperate to be here and is very sorry that he cannot be, but I am glad that I am able to stand here in his place. I am also glad that the hon. and gallant Gentleman was able to make his speech today, as I know he was not able to intervene in the recent solar debate.
Let me start by saying that I absolutely agree. The Government are very clear that, like the hon. and gallant Gentleman, we believe there is an exciting role for floating solar. It is a new technology, but one that we think has huge potential. Developers around the world started to come forward with utility-scale proposals in the past decade, and several large projects have been constructed in recent years, including installations with the capacity to generate hundreds of megawatts of electricity, which have mainly been in China.
The hon. and gallant Gentleman has very effectively set out the upsides of floating solar, so I will not reiterate them. However, I want to put on the record that we agree, and that we recognise many of those upsides.
I will say a little about the state of floating solar in the UK today. There has been some deployment of floating solar in the UK. Lightsource led a project on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir, which is just outside the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, as he mentioned. The project uses 24,000 solar panels to generate around 20% of the site’s electricity needs. It was, at the time of construction, Europe’s largest floating solar installation. There are now other, smaller projects across the country, but the scale is still nascent and very limited.
Ben Obese-Jecty
We have already heard about Grafham Water, which is a large reservoir in my constituency. Just to the north of my constituency, in North East Cambridgeshire, we are about to start building the Fens reservoir, which is, as I am sure the Minister is aware, a joint project between Cambridge Water and Anglian Water. It will be 50 million cubic metres, and the development consent order is expected to go in in 2026, with actual construction starting in 2029. Does the Minister agree that this is a fantastic opportunity to try out this nascent technology on a large project, which could generate so much energy in the Cambridgeshire area?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. There are many schemes and huge opportunities, and the Government are working with industry to think about what the potential is across the country. New proposals are coming forward, and we are trying to engage with them.
Although we see that there is huge potential, it is also important to put that in the context of some of the challenges we face as we try to grow floating solar. We are trying to do our part to work with industry, so we want to ensure that we deal with some of the obstacles and barriers to the schemes that are coming forward—for example, planning or investment certainty. Floating solar projects can apply to the Government’s flagship contracts for difference scheme, and they do.
I know that one of the arguments in favour of floating solar, which the hon. and gallant Gentleman put forward, and which was reiterated by other hon. Members, is that it will reduce the amount of land that we need to use. Arguments have been made about agricultural land and constraining the amount of ground-mounted solar panels on them. I gently say, however, that if we look at the statistics, we see that only 0.1% of land in the UK is covered by ground-mounted solar at the moment—a minuscule amount. Even with the expansion that we are actively trying to encourage, we are still talking about a fraction of UK land that will only ever be used for ground-mounted solar, so it is important to put that in context.
John Cooper
The Minister is right to point to the figures now, but this is a growing problem. One of the difficulties with the land that goes under solar panels is that it tends to be south-facing land, which is prime agricultural land. That is where the crops would normally go, so this is a growing problem.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I recognise that point, but even with the expansion, we are still talking about only a fraction of land. Inevitably, regional and local government will make a judgment about the land that we protect. Everyone recognises that we must have prime agricultural land, because we need it, so we are making decisions, and local government will also be making decisions in that context.
Lincoln Jopp
I just point out to the Minister that she could save herself a vast amount of political pain, because, apart from a few swans that I saw, a couple of seagulls and one man from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, there ain’t many people who are going to complain about putting floating solar on raised reservoirs.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I am always in the market for less pain. Let me say a little bit about some of the constraints. Eligible bids have been submitted to our contracts for difference schemes, but unfortunately none has yet been successful. That is because the cost of floating solar is about 10% to 15% higher than those of ground-mounted projects, and the reason for that is the cost of the floating structures on which the panel sits. And we hear from the sector that these can account for nearly half of the cost of the project. Moreover, floating solar requires expensive underwater cables, which costs more than land-based systems. Therefore, although we are very keen to encourage this technology and to encourage the sector to grow, there is more that needs to be done in order to make them cost effective. From a Government perspective, it is critical that every scheme and every project that we support is cost-effective, so that, in the end, taxpayers are not footing the bill for technology that is too expensive.
John Cooper
I thank the Minister for allowing me to intervene again. She is making a powerful argument for looking again at the CfD scheme, which is notoriously complicated and very difficult. I think we need a two-pronged approach—we need some changes to CfD, but obviously technology associated with solar is moving on all the time, so perhaps the two could come together.
Miatta Fahnbulleh
We will always keep this area under review. We recognise the potential of the technology, and we will continue to work with industry to bring down costs. As the hon. Member says, there are reservoirs and waterways where there are potential problems, but there is also the potential for it to be painless. If we can help to unlock the technology, there will absolutely be appetite from the Government for this. We are trying to invest in research and development in this area, and we are putting in Government support and investment to unlock that.
Finally, the hon. and gallant Gentleman mentioned the solar taskforce. We are working at pace to deliver the taskforce’s recommendations. The taskforce has effectively brought together industry and Government to discuss the actions needed to scale up solar deployment, in line with our 2030 clean power mission. It has identified the need for a road map to address the specific barriers to floating solar and other innovative technologies, and a sub-group has been convened to focus on this specific topic.
Lincoln Jopp
I wonder whether the taskforce has engaged with the company that runs the Queen Elizabeth solar farm; it is called Bluefield—very clever name; very clever company. It wrote to the Secretary of State earlier in the year, some four months ago, but is yet to receive a reply. I would be grateful to know whether the Department is engaging with Bluefield and whether I could nudge the Secretary of State to reply to its letter?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank the hon. and gallant Gentleman for that; his nudge has been taken, and I will pass that on to the Minister for Energy. As a Department, we are trying to engage extensively with industry on how we will take forward the complex and difficult challenges as we try to deliver our clean power mission. If companies and organisations can lend their insights and knowledge to help us develop better policy, we are always in the market for that, so I will pass on the nudge.
We are finishing the final touches to the solar road map, and it is due to be published very soon. While I will not disclose the detail of it, I assure hon. Members that the question of floating solar will be addressed within it. We recognise that floating solar is an exciting area, and we think it has huge potential for deployment in the UK. We are seeing the technology being deployed more broadly in other countries, and we want to be part of that. The hon. and gallant Gentleman has talked about the benefits for the grid, water quality, consumers of electricity and, ultimately, climate change.
There is much to like about floating solar. The challenge for us is to work with industry to ensure that we can unlock its potential. That means reducing the cost, ensuring that it is cost-effective, and ensuring that we can deploy the technology. The one commitment I will make on behalf of the Government is that we will always engage with industry as we do this work. We want the innovation, insight and experience of the brightest and the best as we try to build up our clean power sector, so we will work with industry to unlock the huge potential that we believe is there.
Question put and agreed to.