Asked by: Mark Pritchard (Conservative - The Wrekin)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what steps he is taking to counter engagement with extreme online political content by members of the armed forces.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
The Ministry of Defence remains vigilant to the risks associated with Service personnel engaging with extremist or extreme online political content and treats such matters with the utmost seriousness. Such behaviour is wholly incompatible with the values and standards of the Armed Forces.
Defence maintains clear expectations of conduct, requiring all personnel to uphold the core values of respect, integrity and commitment, and to adhere to strict rules on political impartiality. It also voluntarily applies the Government’s Prevent Duty. Service regulations set out clear restrictions on online and public activity to ensure personnel do not engage in behaviour that could undermine the reputation, neutrality or operational effectiveness of the Armed Forces. Through a combination of clear behavioural standards, mandatory training, counter-terrorism intelligence, vetting and robust personnel policies, Defence works to reduce the risk of Armed Forces personnel engaging with extreme online political content.
Asked by: Mark Pritchard (Conservative - The Wrekin)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, if he will take legislative steps to amend the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 to protect whistleblowers from (a) illegal and (b) unethical work placed practices.
Answered by Kate Dearden - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)
Workers in Great Britain are protected from detriment or dismissal under the whistleblowing framework in the Employment Rights Act 1996, as amended by the Public Interest and Disclosure Act 1998, if they ‘blow the whistle’ on wrongdoing and certain conditions in the legislation are met.
The Government recognises that the whistleblowing framework may not be operating as effectively as it should and recently committed through the Anti-Corruption Strategy 2025 to explore opportunities for reform. We welcome continued engagement with parliamentarians and stakeholders on this important area of public policy.
Asked by: Mark Pritchard (Conservative - The Wrekin)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will convene the pensions forfeiture committee to meet and agree to cease the pensions of ex-UK armed forces personnel who are fighting in support of the Russian Federation's illegal war in Ukraine.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
Pension forfeiture for public service pension schemes, including the Armed Forces Pension Scheme, is governed by primary and secondary legislation, notably the Pensions Act 1995 and the Occupational Pension Schemes (Assignment, Forfeiture, Bankruptcy etc.) Regulations 1997. Under this legislative framework, an Armed Forces pension may only be forfeited following certain serious criminal convictions, except in cases involving a monetary obligation.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) is not aware of any successful convictions of active or former Service Personnel for fighting on behalf of Russia in Ukraine. If the MOD becomes aware of any such convictions, we will consider the implementation of forfeiture policy where relevant.
Asked by: Mark Pritchard (Conservative - The Wrekin)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information her Department holds on whether the Security Service was aware of (a) the illegal activities of Jeffrey Epstein, (b) his relationship with Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and (c) advice given by the Security Service to the Royal Household about these matters.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
It has been the long-standing policy of successive governments not to comment on intelligence matters.