Commons Chamber

Wednesday 17th December 2025

(began 1 hour, 40 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
11:34
11:35
None Portrait Q1. What steps she is taking to support sectors identified in the UK’s Modern Industrial Strategy 2025. (906988)
-

And a happy Christmas to to one and all here and to all your constituents and loved ones. I
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:47
None Portrait Q4. What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on providing additional funding for the ReImagining Supply Chains Network Plus programme. (906991)
-

Well. start by congratulating the hon. Gentleman on his fantastic event in Parliament last week on this subject? I am delighted that Queen's University Belfast is
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:02
12:02
Keir Starmer Portrait Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer MP, The Prime Minister (Holborn and St Pancras, Labour)
-
-
Right? Let us come to Prime Minister's Questions. Melanie Ward. >> Question number one, please, Mr. speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Prime Minister. Mr. speaker, the anti-Semitic terror attack on Bondi Beach was sickening. It has had a profound impact around the world, including on Jewish communities here in the United Kingdom. These incidents are not isolated. We think of the appalling attack at Heaton Park earlier this year, and these incidents are chillingly focussed on some of the holiest days in the Jewish calendar. Mr. speaker, I've been in touch over the last few days with the Community Security Trust, the Home Office and the chief rabbi about security for Hanukkah events here in the United Kingdom.

Last night, we held a Hanukkah reception in Downing Street, where I reaffirmed our fight against the poison of anti-Semitism. We will use all of our powers to make sure Jewish communities are safe and secure, as they should be. Mr. speaker, may I also take this opportunity to wish you all the staff in Parliament, every member and their families across the House, a very happy Christmas. And a little festive advice to those in reform. If if mysterious men from the East appear bearing gifts.

This time, this. This time. Report it to the police. Mr. speaker, this morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House. I shall have further such meetings later today.
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:17
12:18
12:19
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:38
12:40
12:40
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the Draft Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (Remedial) Order 2025
-

Ireland Troubles, Legacy and Reconciliation Act 2023. Remedial order 2025.
12:40
Hilary Benn Portrait Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)
-
-
Secretary of State. Gentleman for his question. This remedial order is a clear signal of the government's commitment to legislation that can command support across Northern Ireland. Its purpose is clear to formally remove some of the provisions in the Northern Ireland Troubles Legacy and Reconciliation Act 2023 that were found by the courts in Dillon to be incompatible with our human rights obligations. Specifically, this means removing the provisions on immunity from prosecution and the bar on troubles related civil cases.

Although the immunity provisions never commenced. It is essential that we formally remove them from the statute book. It is the government's belief that there are compelling reasons for proceeding with this order, and this is a view shared by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which in its report on the 9th of December, agreed that the government has such reasons and recommended that Parliament approve the order. The committee stated that and I quote, in these exceptional and unusual circumstances, the government has sufficiently compelling reasons to proceed by way of a remedial order.

I want to set out what the government believes those reasons to be. Firstly, we must provide clarity on immunity and remove the bar on civil claims as quickly as possible. This is essential for all involved victims, survivors and veterans, and is a prerequisite for building trust. Secondly, providing this clarity is vital to enable the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery to continue its work. It is my view that while immunity a key plank of the 2023 Legacy Act remains on the statute book, it will be difficult for Icerir to obtain the confidence of all victims and survivors.

As the rightly noted, the legacy of the past continues to have a profound and lasting impact, and we know that families and political parties were vehemently opposed to the immunity provisions. While the repeal of immunity is only one aspect of reforming the arrangements put in place by the 2023 act, I am confident that its repeal will result in a greater confidence for referrals to be made. Given that many individuals are elderly, they cannot keep on waiting. It is the government's view that these changes should therefore be made through the remedial order as soon as possible.

Mr. speaker, the government has a clear mandate, compelling reasons and a procedural basis which the JCE has endorsed, and the House will have an opportunity to debate the order in the new year.
12:44
Alex Burghart Portrait Alex Burghart MP (Brentwood and Ongar, Conservative)
-
-
Alex Burghart, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for granting this urgent question, which I've asked because I think that there is asked because I think that there is a very real danger that the government may be about to break the law, and it's very important that the House is aware that the Joint Committee on Human Rights was not in possession of all of the facts when it wrote its report last year. Last year, the High Court in Belfast found parts of the Legacy Act to be incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, and at the time of the last election, the Conservative government was appealing that highly disputable decision.

The incoming Labour government, for reasons it's never disclosed, chose to drop that appeal and subsequently has laid a draft remedial order to amend the legislation. Now, the problem with this, Mr. Speaker, is that earlier this year, the Northern Ireland Veterans Movement was granted permission to intervene in the case before the Supreme Court and on the 15th of October this year, Lord Wolfson KC, acting for the government, did just that and gave written and oral submissions which the court are now considering.

Consequently, it is entirely possible that the declarations of incompatibility relied on by the Secretary of State to lay the remedial order will be quashed. The case is very much alive, and this is very important because under section ten of the Human Rights Act, a government only has the authority to use a remedial order unless and until all appeals in relation to declarations of incompatibility have been determined or abandoned. This test is not met, and if the government decides to push ahead with its remedial order, not only will it be acting ultra vires, it will set a terrible precedent, which will mean that future governments may use remedial orders in ways that they were never intended to use.

To avoid this, all the government needs to do is to commit to not pushing its remedial order to a vote until the Supreme Court has finally ruled. Will the commitment?
12:45
Hilary Benn Portrait Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)
-
-
Very well done, sir. >> Very well done, sir. >> Well, I'm grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the point that he has Gentleman for the point that he has raised. But I would say to him that the argument he puts is not correct. The appeal was abandoned by the government in July 2024. And he says the reasons that have never been disclosed, the government have been absolutely clear from the beginning. We disagree with immunity and we are committed to repeal and replace the Legacy Act.

And section ten gives a Secretary of State the ability to make a remedial order when a declaration of incompatibility has been made and any appeal has been determined or abandoned, it has been abandoned by the government. Now the the hon. Gentleman has suggested that the ongoing Supreme Court appeal in Dillon means that the conditions have not been met, and therefore suggests that we may lack the virus to lay this order. I do not agree with his assessment and have made the position clear to the hon.

Member in the correspondence that we have had, I think, an exchange of two emails and two letters. I can confirm to the House that in July 2024, the government formally abandoned its appeal concerning the declaration of incompatibility relating to immunity from prosecution. That declaration was not part of the appeal that is now before the Supreme Court, and the fact that the Northern Ireland Veterans Movement was granted permission to intervene does not alter this legal reality.
12:47
12:48
Hilary Benn Portrait Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)
-
-
I do agree with my hon. Friend, >> I do agree with my hon. Friend, and I would just further say that the hon. Gentleman who speaks for the hon. Gentleman who speaks for the opposition and the principal opposition party remain, it seems, wedded to immunity, which was contained. Well, the the hon. Gentleman says once again, as he does in all these debates. Conditional immunity. I think the last time we debated it, I reminded him what the legislation of the last government said.

It said that the Commission must give immunity. Must give immunity. If, if, if, if the conditions for giving immunity are met, which are quite clearly. Well, the the the hon. Gentleman, the hon. Gentleman have not reminded themselves of what their legislation said. All that was required was that for somebody to come forward and to say what they had done, and if what they had done was an offence, then the Commission must grant them immunity. And I would say to the opposition that at some point they do need to recognise, they do need to recognise that that provision for immunity for terrorists, because the last government said we wish to give immunity to terrorists, had no support in Northern Ireland.

And I'm sorry that they don't recognise that because I've said on many occasions progress cannot be made in trying to deal with the problem of legacy, when the provision that is in the current legislation, which we are committed to repeal and replace, has no support in the place that suffered more than anywhere else during the course of the troubles.
12:49
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page