(1 day, 15 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Sarah Owen)
Ministers and officials are in regular contact with the Department for Transport on dual approvals for passenger vehicles and Northern Ireland’s automotive sector. The Government remain committed to ensuring that vehicle supply remains as seamless as possible across the whole of the UK. This was shown when the Government secured fairness on the tax treatment of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, supporting dealerships and car buyers.
Mr Campbell
Northern Ireland car dealers pay their taxes to the UK Treasury and they must be able to compete on equal terms with dealerships across the rest of the country. At present, they cannot. Action is needed, not just complaints from others. Will the Secretary of State or the Minister meet representatives of Northern Ireland car dealers and talk to their Cabinet colleagues to ensure that cars approved for sale in Great Britain can also be sold new by Northern Ireland dealerships? How soon can this be delivered?
Sarah Owen
We are continuing to engage with Northern Ireland car market representatives, as well as the broader UK automotive industry, on issues faced by Northern Ireland car dealers. We want to see the sector go from strength to strength, and I am happy to meet with anybody who shares that mission. I also want to address the fact that the hon. Gentleman has raised the lack of response to a particular letter from the National Franchised Dealers Association. I will ensure that that is rectified by the end of the week, and it will get a response.
Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) (Lab)
Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Chris Bryant)
The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, which finished its remaining stages in this House yesterday, will deliver a reformed independent legacy commission with stronger disclosure powers that will be critical for families and victims seeking answers and access to justice. It will also repeal the immunity scheme and lift the bar on civil claims, which the previous Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 wrongly introduced.
Ian Byrne
I know that my right hon. Friend is fully aware of the care we must all take over the language we use when we discuss troubles-related affairs. He may recall that the Law Society and the Bar Council have called recent references by some hon. Members to supposed “IRA lawyers” grossly irresponsible and said that it puts people at risk. Given the tragic history of the murder of lawyers such as Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson, will he join me in urging all hon. Members to take extreme care over their language and recognise that their words can have tragic consequences and completely undermine the confidence of bereaved families and victims, which is essential to ensuring a balanced and credible legacy process?
Chris Bryant
First, I would say that the legal profession is a noble profession and that—[Interruption.] I am not sure I have carried the Conservative Front Bench with that line. If we are to uphold the rule of law, we have to make sure that lawyers are protected in their ability to defend people in the criminal justice system. The idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty is fundamental to our system. That is why I think it behoves all of us to be careful about our language.
Andy McDonald
The Bill we passed last night gives the Attorney General of England and Wales the power to override decisions on troubles-related prosecutions, yet the Secretary of State told the House yesterday:
“This is not to take anything away from the prosecuting authorities in Northern Ireland or in Great Britain.”—[Official Report, 20 October 2026; Vol. 791, c. 1018.]
But that is precisely what the Bill does. The Attorney General could effectively overrule a decision by Northern Ireland’s independent Public Prosecution Service. How can the Secretary of State reconcile that with the 2000 criminal justice review that flowed from the Good Friday agreement, which deliberately removed political interference from prosecution decisions?
Chris Bryant
Let me be absolutely clear: there will be no political interference in any of these decisions. We think that it is appropriate—as was recommended by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, made up of Members from both our two Houses—that the prosecuting authorities in Northern Ireland and in England and Wales both come to their conclusions. We will draw up guidelines on how to deal with troubles-related issues that may follow on from the legacy commission. But in the end, the final prosecutorial decision is a very simple non-political one: whether it is in the public interest and whether there is more than a 50% likelihood of getting a successful conviction. I am glad that yesterday evening the Committee of the whole House agreed that without a Division.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
How does the Secretary of State think victims of the Provisional IRA felt when they heard the Police Service of Northern Ireland confirm that the provos still exist and that the Chief Constable, and perhaps the Secretary of State, were influenced on Drumcree by the feelings of the Provisional IRA? What does that even mean—taking account of the feelings of the Provisional IRA?
Chris Bryant
Mr Speaker, I know that you would not want me to intrude on an ongoing judicial review. The judge reserved his judgement yesterday, so I will not do that, I am afraid.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
The Government’s Bill will undoubtedly open up the prospect of reopened coroners’ inquests into deaths that occurred during the troubles. What confidence does the Secretary of State have in the Northern Ireland coronial service to deliver truth and justice—and, importantly, access to the truth—for victims and veterans compared with the coronial system in England and Wales?
Chris Bryant
I note that the cast list for the Chamber today is very similar to yesterday’s and the day before, and that some of these issues were adumbrated in the discussions we had. There is obviously a difference in the coronial system in Northern Ireland. I have heard people make suggestions about how we might want to reform it. One of the reforms we have put in the Bill, which I think is important, is that inquests will no longer be allowed to repeat processes undergone elsewhere, just as the legacy commission will not be able to do so.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
As this is the Secretary of State’s first Northern Ireland questions, may I welcome him to his place? Victims and survivors of the troubles will, as the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) said, be deeply concerned to hear that on Monday police intelligence documents produced in the High Court in Belfast referred to the ongoing existence of the IRA. Will the Secretary of State please tell the House: is it the Government’s understanding that the IRA is still active?
Chris Bryant
I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is asking me to talk again about proceedings in the High Court in Northern Ireland, and I think it would be inappropriate for me to do so.
Alex Burghart
With all due respect, I was not asking the Secretary of State to comment on the case; I know that he cannot. I was asking him to tell us what the Government’s considered opinion is on whether the IRA is still active. That is important, because one of the documents produced on Monday revealed—
Alex Burghart
This is for context. The document revealed that the Secretary of State was told by the police,
“it is possible that dissident republicans have already accessed the firearms in the Garvaghy Road area, and it is possible that in the event of police removing protesters, firearms may be used to attack police.”
It would not interfere with the court process for the Secretary of State to tell us this: is it his understanding that the IRA has rearmed?
Chris Bryant
The shadow Secretary of State is asking me to comment on documents produced in the judicial review into my decision on Drumcree. I am not going to do that, because I think it would conflict with the judicial review process and I do not want to be held in contempt of court.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
As the Secretary of State said, the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill has now passed to the other place, notwithstanding the continuing concerns of senior generals and veterans associations; more still needs to be done. I than him for his sustained engagement and openness with veterans organisations, including the SAS Regimental Association, with whom I have been working closely. We must avoid any adversarial framing of the relationship between veterans and victims, as I remain convinced that a compromise to ensure proper protections for veterans can be achieved while delivering justice for victims. Will he commit to continuing to work with the SAS Regimental Association and its lawyers to ensure that the Bill delivers the vital safeguards that our veterans need?
Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP)
The Secretary of State will know that Micheál Martin will apologise today to the family of Brian Stack, who was murdered by the IRA in 1983. They apologise 43 years later and they apologise after a failed criminal justice investigation with 194 errors and omissions. They are right to do so. Austin Stack, the son of Brian, has also asked that Sinn Féin, and Mary Lou McDonald as its leader, apologise on behalf of her counterparts in the IRA. One of the things that has not been mentioned over the last two days is how much confidence there will be that those who took lives and hold deep and dark truths will share them with the loved ones of victims. Can the Secretary of State give any confidence on that?
Chris Bryant
I heard the interview this morning on the radio, and I warmly welcome the fact that the Taoiseach will make that apology. It is entirely right and proper. This relates to some of the discussions that we had yesterday and the day before about how the Irish Government deal with the issues of the past. This was a prison guard from the United Kingdom who was killed in Dublin. I also heard the point that his son Austin made, when he said that the apology
“means an awful lot to us”.
It is incumbent on all of us to make fulsome, and not mealy-mouthed, apologies.
Gavin Robinson
One of the fundamental principles of the debate yesterday and on Monday was that of upholding the rule of law, and the Secretary of State will know our questions about how the rule of law is upheld in Northern Ireland. I know that he buckled when individuals suggested that the Government had bent the knee to terror, yet some of the revelations from the court proceedings over the last two days give greater clarity to the thought process that lay behind the PSNI’s position. My question is this: given the situation that we are in, will the Secretary of State engage, not only to uphold the rule of law and ensure that criminal sanctions go beyond blocking a road, but to provide political accountability for those who breach their pledge of office?
Chris Bryant
The right hon. Gentleman makes a strong point about political accountability. The rule of law is something that we all pledge to uphold when we become Members of Parliament. That is also true of Members of the Legislative Assembly and, for that matter, members of the Executive. I also think that we need to have political accountability for the finances in Northern Ireland. It is really important that we make sure that at some point or other, the Northern Ireland Executive get round to settling a budget. We have set aside more than £1.5 billion for the next three years. I look forward to conversations with the right hon. Gentleman and others tomorrow, and I very much hope that we might be able to settle that. He is right that we need to have political and financial accountability, and if that means changing the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to achieve that, I am up for that.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Chris Bryant)
The hon. Lady asks what steps we are taking to replace the legacy Act of 2023. I refer her to the debates of yesterday and the day before.
Rebecca Smith
Yesterday’s vote on Third Reading on the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill has reopened the door to continual vexatious cases against Northern Ireland veterans, including Alan, Ewen and Ivar from my constituency. Will the Secretary of State continue to work on the Bill, which many agree is not perfect, to ensure that there are adequate protections against lawfare?
Chris Bryant
It is important to say, not only after we have we completed our processes here but now that the Bill will go to the House of Lords, that I am happy, as I said to the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler), to work with all the different associations, including veterans in the hon. Lady’s constituency if she has people who want to meet me, to make sure that we end up with a Bill that really works. I urge her and all hon. Members to say to veterans in their constituencies: first, there will be answers for veterans’ families because many lost loved ones; and secondly, no veteran will be cold called, no veteran will be approached unless there is compelling new evidence and no process will be repeated unless it is essential. Those are guarantees for all, but in particular for our veterans.
Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab)
The previous Government’s legacy Act failed to command the confidence of victims, survivors and many veterans. Will the Secretary of State join me in thanking the organisations that represent them that have engaged with my Committee, with Members across this House and with him?
Chris Bryant
I am really grateful to my hon. Friend, because she is absolutely right. Although sometimes I think our debates have felt as though the Bill was an armed forces Bill, it is actually a Bill that is primarily about families, including the families of veterans, of course. Joe McVey, who brought several members of his group here earlier this week, has very much informed the debate that we have had, but in the end, the most important thing is getting answers for families, and my hon. Friend’s Committee has led the way on that.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
The Government have united the SAS Regimental Association, the Special Boat Service Association and the Special Reconnaissance Regimental Association against the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, with the SAS Regimental Association dismissing the legislation as
“incoherent, contradictory, imprecise and muddled”.
They are rightly concerned about the potential impact of the Bill on special forces recruitment and retention, and yesterday the Government voted down the Opposition amendment that would have given Parliament proper oversight of this. As the Bill begins its passage through the other place, will the Secretary of State work with the Ministry of Defence to ensure that Parliament has sufficient oversight of special forces recruitment and retention?
Chris Bryant
As I said yesterday, it would be false to make a direct equation between special forces recruitment and our Bill. As I pointed out, recruitment to the armed forces is 7% up at the moment, for the first time. It is true, of course, that we want to ensure that confidence and morale in the armed forces are upheld, and I think our Bill will help to achieve that. I would just push back on one point. The hon. Gentleman says that everybody is united, but actually there are many different views on the Bill in the veterans community. I am very happy to work with all the different associations to make sure that we get to the right answers at the end of the process.
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Chris Bryant)
The Government are committed to supporting all our veterans, including those who served under Operation Banner, and to ensuring that they receive fair treatment and consistent support. That is why we are expanding the armed forces covenant to remove disadvantages and recognise sacrifices. The Ministry of Defence recently announced that the Brooke House health and wellbeing centre, which does brilliant work to support veterans, has been awarded £1 million to develop a Valour-recognised centre in Northern Ireland.
Sarah Pochin
Why does the Secretary of State think that he and his Government know better than the SAS, the SBS, all other Northern Ireland veterans and the former Defence Minister, the hon. Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), who all warn that this troubles Bill will risk further prosecutions of our brave veterans?
Chris Bryant
Actually, I disagree with the hon. Member. I have had many conversations with a lot of veterans associations, and all of them have recognised many of the changes that we brought into the Bill. These include introducing the concept of compelling new evidence before anybody can be called as a witness; ensuring that the concept of “essential” is a high bar, not a low bar, for people; and ensuring that nobody can be cold called. I am very happy to work with all hon. Members to make sure that the Bill, in its final version, is one that everybody can support.
Andrew Ranger
Forty-seven years ago, Private Robert Vaughan Jones, the brother of my constituent Edward, was one of the 18 British paratroopers tragically killed in the Warrenpoint ambush. Robert’s parents passed away never knowing the facts of their son’s death, and Edward fears that he, too, might never know the full story of what happened. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government remain committed to providing closure to the families of troubles victims, and that the transferral of cases from the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery to the new legacy commission will not impact or further delay the delivery of those answers?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have to make sure that the legacy commission takes on the good work that has been done by ICRIR, even as we are improving it, so that it can get more answers for people. I also want to push back against the idea that there are veterans on one side and families on the other. Actually, a very large number of the people who are seeking answers—and will do through the legacy commission—are the families of veterans.
Peter Swallow
At the heart of this lies a really important principle. Can my right hon. Friend set out why those of us on the Government Benches do not believe it is morally acceptable to offer immunity to terrorists involved in killing not only innocent civilians but, as we have just heard, those brave servicepeople who served their country on Operation Banner?
Chris Bryant
One of the reasons we had a manifesto commitment and said this before the last general election was that we believe the legacy Act 2023 was morally and legally deficient—legally deficient as it was struck down in the courts, and morally deficient because it made an equivalence between the lawful action of our armed forces seeking to preserve the peace and the deliberate acts of terrorists. We think that was morally wrong and offensive.
Richard Baker
Fife is home to more veterans than any other part of Scotland, many of whom gave dedicated service to this country as part of Operation Banner. Can my right hon. Friend assure these veterans, whom many Members spoke of in the debates this week, that their rights and welfare will be not only always protected, but extended through our pledge to the armed forces covenant?
Chris Bryant
One of the things that I have campaigned on for many years is acquired brain injury. One of my anxieties about what has happened to veterans in this country over the years is that it has felt as though we have sort of left them to one side. It is shocking that we still have so many veterans who are homeless. I am proud that one of the first things our Prime Minister said was that he wants to end homelessness. We need to do that in Northern Ireland, just as anywhere else in the United Kingdom. We also need to ensure that our veterans get the real support they need to be able to live fruitful lives and work after their service.
Luke Akehurst
Veterans in my constituency were let down by the previous Government’s legacy Act, which offered nothing but false promises. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give to Operation Banner veterans in North Durham that they will not be subject to unnecessary repeat investigations and that the operational context of their deployment will be taken into account?
Chris Bryant
One of the key asks of all the veterans organisations was that we should introduce a change to the Bill to state that there was no equivalence between the lawful actions of our armed forces and those of terrorists, and recognise the operational context in which people were functioning, including their training, their command structure and so on. That is precisely what we have done in the legislation, and I commend my hon. Friend for the way he has raised many of these issues with me directly on behalf of the veterans in his constituency.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
The Secretary of State has made much of his support for veterans, and that is right, although it has come late. Will he give the same support and reassurance from the Government to the former members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the police services who also served during the troubles?
Chris Bryant
The hon. Member makes a really good point about former members of the RUC. I was very struck when I visited the RUC memorial garden in Belfast, where we can see, decade after decade, the number of RUC officers who were killed in action. As we get closer to the ’60s, the ’70s, the ’80s and the ’90s, those numbers go from three, four or five to dozens. We owe them a debt of gratitude, and I say to them, as I say to everybody who served under Operation Banner: thank you for your service.
Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)
Can the Secretary of State reassure Operation Banner veterans that in recent legacy investigations and future ones the Government will seek all necessary records and evidence from the Irish Government, because we on the opposition side of the House do not believe that will happen? Could he ask the Taoiseach if he would make a public statement to reassure us that the Irish Government will release all their documents?
Chris Bryant
It is absolutely essential that the Irish Government fully co-operate with the process. I am very confident that they will do so. I have spoken directly to Jim O’Callaghan and Helen McEntee, the two Ministers responsible for these issues in the Irish Government. But they are partners of ours; we need to work with them to be able to get answers for the many thousands of people who lost loved ones during the troubles era.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. Beyond the Battlefield in my constituency delivers care for those soldiers and veterans who fall under the radar and are not picked up by the charities—those who have PTSD, have had family breakdowns or have been in prison. What can be done to ensure that Beyond the Battlefield, which looks after the veterans who others forget about, has the necessary funding to allow it to do more and to help more people?
Chris Bryant
I did not catch all of that—I am not sure whether you did, Mr Speaker—but I think I heard “PTSD”. As I said earlier, one of the things I have campaigned on is acquired brain injury. I suspect that many people in the armed forces were told that they had PTSD but actually had an acquired brain injury that had never been properly diagnosed. It is one of the pieces of work that we need to do far more effectively. I want to look at how we properly look after those who are serving now in Northern Ireland into the future to ensure that they can have the most fruitful lives possible.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Secretary of State twice refused to answer questions about documents referred to in judicial review proceedings in the High Court in Belfast that refer to the ongoing existence of the IRA. Can you confirm that there is no parliamentary rule, including the sub judice rule, that would have prevented the Secretary of State from answering those questions?
Mr Speaker
I can confirm that the sub judice rule does not apply to judicial review proceedings that relate to a ministerial decision, as in this case. However, the answers given by the Secretary of State are a matter for him and not for the Chair, so I will not be drawn into that.