Medal for Wounded Service Personnel

David Baines Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Vickers (in the Chair)]

I will call David Baines to move the motion, and will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may only make a speech with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate. As is the convention in 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.

[David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the potential merits of a medal for service personnel wounded in combat.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. The UK’s military honours system is comprehensive. We recognise gallantry through the Victoria Cross and the George Cross. We commemorate operational service through campaign medals. We created the Elizabeth Cross in 2009 for families of the fallen. Yet there remains no official recognition for those wounded in service. Unlike the United States, with their Purple Heart, the British armed forces have no equivalent. While everyone who serves deserves recognition, I believe that those who are injured deserve special acknowledgment of their sacrifice.

Let me start by saying that serving in the military is a positive and honourable career choice. Like everyone in my constituency of St Helens North, I am proud of our community’s history and heritage of service, and I am incredibly thankful and respectful of all those who serve today and everything they do. I have heard at first hand from servicemen and women that a life in the forces brings with it fantastic opportunities for those who join—opportunities for education, training, travel and personal development.

Our armed forces play a significant role in defending and protecting us all and we should celebrate that, but those who join the armed forces know that by the intention and design of their role they are significantly more likely to face hostile action than those in other public services. Military personnel are deployed specifically to environments where armed enemies attempt to kill or injure them. That is the fundamental nature of military service, not a criticism of it, but we need to recognise the unique sacrifice that it entails.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward the debate. I spoke to him beforehand. Obviously, I am a Northern Ireland MP, and I declare an interest as someone who served in the forces in Northern Ireland for some 14 and a half years. I gently remind Members that many soldiers were wounded in combat while serving in the Northern Ireland troubles. I believe they deserve formal recognition for their sacrifice—the very thing the hon. Gentleman is referring to.

For over three decades, British soldiers, many barely out of their teens, patrolled our streets, stood between communities and faced down threats to protect civilians from terrorism and uphold the law. What the hon. Gentleman refers to is about acknowledging the lasting physical and emotional scars borne by those who serve. Does he agree that awarding a dedicated medal to those wounded in combat during the troubles would be a moral gesture and the right thing to do?

--- Later in debate ---

[David Baines]

I completely agree with the hon. Member; he makes an excellent point.

According to Ministry of Defence statistics, since January 2006 a total of 2,644 personnel have sustained battle injuries while on operation—that is, they were wounded as a result of hostile action. Behind every one of those numbers is a person like my constituent Corporal Andy Reid MBE, whose life has been permanently altered in service to this nation yet who receives no specific recognition for the wounds that he carries.

On 13 October 2009, Andy stepped on an improvised explosive device while on patrol in Helmand Province. He was 22 years old. The explosion destroyed his right leg below the knee, his left leg above the knee and his right arm above the elbow. Medical professionals doubted that he would survive, yet after just two weeks in hospital Andy made his first trip home to St Helens. Within a month, he met up with members of his patrol again.

What Andy has achieved since is extraordinary. He married his wife Claire and became a father to two children. He climbed Mount Kilimanjaro on prosthetic legs, becoming the first triple amputee in the UK to do so. He raised over £200,000 for armed forces charities and he has established the Standing Tall Foundation in St Helens, providing mental health support and counselling for veterans and non-veterans alike. He received an MBE in 2019 for voluntary service to veterans and people with disabilities.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing forward the debate. I fully support this excellent campaign to create a brand-new medal for all servicemen and women who have been wounded in combat. He mentions Andy Reid’s charitable works, which are legendary in themselves. I had the pleasure of meeting Andy at the recent Rochdale Man of the Year awards, where he raised many more thousands of pounds for our local Springhill hospice. Does my hon. Friend agree that Andy’s main motivation is his motto that he is not a victim but a survivor? That goes to the heart of this medal: all those wounded in the line of service deserve recognition by their country. Those like Andy who have literally risked life and limb deserve that recognition more than anyone.

[David Baines]

I completely agree. Andy’s motto, that he is a survivor, not a victim, is not about wallowing in what has happened but recognising it and using it to grow and help others. That is exactly what he is doing day in, day out.

Andy wears his operational service medal for Afghanistan with pride, but that medal tells only part of his story. It records where he served, not what he sacrificed; it does not mark the physical wounds he carries or the daily challenges he faces with tasks that others take for granted. Andy’s story is tragically not unique. The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan created a generation of wounded veterans. Thousands carry visible injuries—amputations, severe burns, blindness—while others carry hidden wounds, both physical and mental.

Advances in battlefield medicine mean that many personnel thankfully survive injuries that would have been fatal in previous conflicts. That means more wounded veterans living among us, many facing lifelong challenges. Those men and women deserve formal recognition. Andy has been publicly advocating for the medal, drawing on his experience and extensive work with the veterans community.

This is not the only campaign being fought for such recognition. Recently, the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) led a debate on establishing an injury in service award for emergency service personnel: police officers, firefighters and paramedics who have been injured in the line of duty. I fully support that campaign; it is good to see Parliament giving serious attention to recognising those injured while serving the public, which is long overdue. The campaigns for emergency services recognition and for a wounded in action medal both speak to the same principle: when people put their bodies on the line in service to others and pay a physical price, their sacrifice deserves formal acknowledgement.

I want to be clear that this debate and a call for a medal for service personnel injured in combat is not about comparing public services. I completely support the call for recognition of those in the emergency services. Some would maybe combine the two campaigns into one medal, but I believe that our emergency services deserve unique recognition. I would also argue that the fundamental nature of military service—men and women deployed specifically to environments where armed enemies attempt to kill or injure them—is likewise worthy of separate and significant recognition.

The Government have set an admirable goal: to make Britain the best place in the world to be a veteran, using a whole-society approach. This proposal for a new medal fits squarely within that vision. Defence companies have expressed positive interest in funding it. They recognise their obligation to support those wounded in service. With industry support, the cost to the public purse could be minimal. Even bearing the full cost, we are talking about recognition for individuals who have surely paid far more than any price we could put on a medal.

This is the whole-society approach in action: Government setting policy, industry contributing resources, and the voluntary sector providing support, as I am sure it would. The medal would be the visible symbol at the centre of this effort. I believe it could also help to boost recruitment and retention, which the Government are keen to do. Those considering military service rightly want to know that any sacrifice they may have to make will be formally recognised. This new medal is, therefore, practical policy as well as a moral imperative. As to the injuries that might be eligible for the medal and how far back it would apply, my strong feeling is that veterans’ organisations and forces personnel should be involved in setting the terms. This would be their medal and they should own it. I do not believe it should be for MPs or civil servants to decide those details.

Andy Reid does not lead this campaign because he seeks personal glory. He already has an MBE, the respect of his community and the gratitude of the charities he has raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for. He campaigns because recognition matters. He has met countless wounded veterans who feel that their sacrifice too often goes unacknowledged. He believes those who have been injured in service to this country deserve to have that sacrifice formally recognised.

[Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)]

I completely endorse what my hon. Friend is saying and his plan for a medal. Does he agree that organisations such as Veterans in Sefton in my constituency do a remarkable job, supporting people across Merseyside? This would be another symbol of our support for our veterans, who do such a fantastic job for our country.

[David Baines]

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. In our part of the world, we have a long and proud history of service in the armed forces; I know it is the same in his part of Merseyside as it is in mine. I thank him for raising that point and putting it on the record.

I agree with Andy Reid and all those calling for this new medal. I am sure that many people in this country would agree too. It is time to address the gap in the system, honour our wounded and introduce formal recognition that says to every serviceperson wounded in defence of our nation, “We see you, we honour you, and we’ll never forget what you’ve given.”

Remembrance Day: Armed Forces

David Baines Excerpts

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)]

The communities I represent in St Helens North have a long and proud connection with the armed forces, from the St Helens Pals of the first world war, to groups such as Newton-le-Willows sea cadets and local veterans organisations, who do outstanding community work across the borough. Last week, in Parliament’s garden of remembrance, I planted a cross dedicated to Corporal Derek Johnson, who lived in Haydock, and who sadly passed away in June. He served in the 2nd Battalion, the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, and went on to found the North West Veterans Corps of Drums, which supports the veterans community and takes part in fantastic public performances.

In September, we welcomed the Minister for the Armed Forces to St Helens North to meet local veterans and discuss what more we can do to ensure that all those who have served get the support that they need and deserve. The veterans’ strategy announced yesterday is a hugely positive step towards ensuring that no one who served is left behind, but there is always more that we can do.

My constituent Andy Reid MBE is a triple amputee who was injured by an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan in 2009. In the years since, he has done a huge amount of work for wounded veterans, charities and the wider community through his Standing Tall Foundation. He is calling for a new medal to address a significant gap in our honours system. The UK has no formal medal to recognise service personnel wounded in combat. While we rightly honour those who have fallen through the Elizabeth Cross, there is no equivalent recognition for those who carry the physical scars of their service throughout their life. That places us out of step with key allies such as the United States, which has the Purple Heart, and India, which has the Wound medal. I fully support his campaign. I have already raised the matter with Ministry of Defence colleagues, and will be writing to the Cabinet Office to set out the case.

On Sunday, I had the honour of attending remembrance events in Earlestown, Haydock, and St Aidan’s church in Billinge. This morning, I attended a moving service at the Crank and Kings Moss war memorial.

When we attend remembrance events, we remember all those who served, and especially those who made the ultimate sacrifice, but we also think about what they fought for and whether we are living up to the ideals that they defended. Sadly, the last witnesses of the great war have now left us, and those who witnessed the second world war and experienced its causes and consequences are increasingly fewer in number. I think of my grandparents, Gerald and Elsie Howard, and Peter and Joan Baines, who are no longer with us. I think about them all increasingly often. I did not ask them about their experiences when I had the chance—I wish that I had—but I do know the kind of people they were, and what mattered to them. They worked hard all their lives, they loved their families, they valued community and good humour, and they believed that people should look out for one another. I do not think we have changed that much. My grandparents and their generation fought for and earned the right to live in peace, and it seems to me that that is a fight that every generation has to have, in one form or another.

The voices and the experiences of those generations who lived through something similar to what we face now might be increasingly distant, but we must remember them, and we do. It is also important that we learn from them. I firmly believe that the tolerant, firm-minded, community-spirited and outward-looking Britain that my grandparents fought for and loved is still who we are. We can all play our part in defending those values—and we must, particularly those of us in this place—but there should be no doubt that those who are willing to step up and do so in uniform as members of our armed forces deserve the greatest praise. All those in St Helens North who served, and all those who continue to do so, can be assured of not just my thanks, but my support.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Order. With an immediate three-minute time limit, I call Martin Vickers.

Armed Forces Commissioner Bill

David Baines Excerpts

Consideration of Lords message
Wednesday 2nd July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, and I agree with him. It is precisely for that reason that the Government are insisting on our amendment and not accepting the Opposition amendment made in the other place, because that amendment does not include family members. I agree that including loved ones—family members, for the purposes of the wording of the Bill—within the remit of the Armed Forces Commissioner is an important new step in providing not just members in uniform, but their immediate family members as defined in the secondary legislation that will accompany the Bill, with the opportunity to raise a general service welfare matter.

I agree that there is a lot more we can debate on these matters, and there will be an opportunity to do so during the passage of the next armed forces Bill. However, I say to all Members that I am concerned that going round again on this matter only holds up delivery of a key element that will be used to tackle the very issues this amendment seeks to address. Namely, it holds up the establishment of an Armed Forces Commissioner, which was a key manifesto commitment for defence. The longer this Bill is prevented from becoming law, the greater the disservice we do to our armed forces and their families. I sincerely hope that today we can send a united message from this House that we do not wish to delay this vital legislation any further.

[David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)]

Like everyone else in this House, I am incredibly proud of our armed forces, and particularly of our relationship with them in St Helens. Just yesterday, the Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment paraded through St Helens town centre after being awarded the freedom of the borough—we are so incredibly proud. Does the Minister agree that we just need to get on with this now, so that we can show a united front and speak with one voice in support of our armed forces, and give them the support they need?

[Luke Pollard]

I thank my hon. Friend for placing on the record the military events in his constituency. It is so important that we recognise the links and ties that so many of our military units have with the localities from which they recruit, where they are based and where they serve. I agree with his broader point; the time is right for us to pass this Bill, get it into law, and allow us to move to a situation in which we have an Armed Forces Commissioner able to deal with the issues raised by our people and their family members.

The Government took on board the important debates in both Houses and proposed amendment 2A, to which this House previously agreed. That amendment honoured the spirit of the noble Baroness’s amendments in the other place and actually went further than her proposals, delivering concrete legal protections that were not included in the amendments that are back before us today. We are seeking to reinsert that better amendment, which was made early in the process and in good faith, following discussions and co-operation with the Opposition in the other place. Given the strong cross-party support for the Bill and clear arguments in favour of the amendment in lieu, we had been hoping that that would enable us to conclude proceedings. The Government amendment will establish genuine protection for people wishing to raise a concern anonymously, and will build trust and confidence among our armed forces and their families in a way we cannot envisage will be achieved by the proposed amendments that are before us today.