John Healey
Main Page: John Healey (Labour - Rawmarsh and Conisbrough)Department Debates - View all John Healey's debates with the Ministry of Defence
(1 day, 20 hours ago)
Commons ChamberThe House will note that this afternoon we are without the Minister for Veterans and People, my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns). He is halfway up Everest with a group of soldiers, raising funds for armed forces charities and raising the profile of veterans, and I am sure that the whole House wishes him well. Most of us also think, “Rather him than me.”
This Government have confirmed the biggest increase in defence spending since the end of the cold war, which will boost national security and make defence the engine for growth in every part of the United Kingdom. For too long, small businesses have felt left out of defence, but no more. We are setting new targets to ensure that smaller firms benefit from that increase in defence spending. We are setting up a new support centre to guide small businesses on access to defence and, for the first time, we are making British-based businesses a priority for British taxpayers’ defence investment.
I, too, wish the Veterans Minister the best of luck as he climbs Everest, and I am sure we all agree: rather him than us.
In today’s world warfare is changing dramatically. Drones costing $1,000 can destroy tanks worth $10 million, but the innovation cycle for those drones is rapid; they are designed to become obsolete within months. We need a dynamic SME sector to produce those drones, but defence SMEs are struggling to get the finance they need, with a lack of long-term contracts and a lack of guarantees. A multilateral defence bank could help to ensure that those firms get the finance they need. Will the Secretary of State please set out the discussions he is having to help to found that multilateral defence bank?
My hon. Friend is quite right about the fact that capabilities are now changing in weeks, not months or even years. He is also right about finance. That is why I went to the London stock exchange last week and closed the markets—I think it was the first time a Defence Secretary has ever done that. I wanted to signal that this Government want a new partnership with not just industry and innovators, but investors, and that means changing the way in which defence does its work.
I have met outstanding UK SMEs, such as Supacat, 4GD and many others, which contribute to the sovereign industrial base that our security depends on. However, under the last Government, the percentage of Ministry of Defence direct expenditure going to SMEs fell, from 5% to 4%. Will my right hon. Friend confirm when this Government expect to surpass that record and therefore back the innovation we need to equip our forces and support our allies?
I congratulate and thank my hon. Friend, as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker), for the work that they are doing on innovative finance, which will help SMEs in future. I look forward to the publication of their Royal United Services Institute report shortly. I can confirm that SME involvement in the defence supply chain will be boosted by new spending targets that I will set in June to produce exactly the sort of result that my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) is looking for.
When I spoke at the Make UK Defence summit in Derby, I met with lots of small and medium-sized businesses in the sector. The issues that they raised with me were echoed during my visit last week to a local composites manufacturer, Pentaxia, including accessing finance to grow and complicated defence procurement processes. What is the Defence Secretary doing to engage with small and medium-sized companies to ensure that they can get a fair crack at Government defence contracts?
My hon. Friend knows better than most the challenge for small firms entering into the supply chain in defence, and she does more than most to champion their case. We want defence to do business differently, and making it easier for small firms and newer entrants to start doing their business with defence a big part of that. That is why we have announced a new SME support centre—a new front door for small firms that can then become part of the defence supply chain, unlocking new jobs and putting more money in the pockets of workers.
Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of hosting a roundtable and listening to businesses in Derby—small and medium-sized businesses in engineering and manufacturing, including the vital defence sector. With nearly 70% of Government defence spending directed towards businesses outside of London and the south-east, we know how every pound spent with UK defence businesses has the power to create jobs and employment for local people. Will the Secretary of State therefore outline how the Department will ensure that as many SMEs as possible are aware of Government procurement opportunities, so that they can deliver jobs in areas such as Derby?
My hon. Friend makes an important point. The access of SMEs to defence is very often through primes and subcontracting, rather than directly with the Ministry of Defence itself. It is the certainty of long-term relationships and long-term contracts for the primes that allow them to pass those benefits on to smaller firms. That is why it is significant that when my hon. Friend joined me at the Derby Rolls-Royce factory when I announced the eight-year £9 billion Unity contract for Rolls-Royce, 240 small firms were part of that submarine supply chain.
I do not wish to end the Defence Secretary’s glittering career here on the Floor of the House, but may I praise him as my new favourite Minister—alongside the Defence Procurement Minister—for today announcing the new £400 million investment in my Shropshire constituency for Rheinmetall to build a new gun barrel factory? I thank him and his Defence Procurement Minister for working with me, across parties and in the national interest, to ensure that the UK has the very latest and most technologically advanced Challenger 3 tank—the best in NATO.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that question. We will always work across parties in the national interest and in the interests of defence— I hope he is wrong that doing so may ruin my career. Nevertheless, I am grateful to him for noticing the £400 million investment in its Telford factory that Rheinmetall is announcing today. That is a direct response to the UK-German defence agreement that I signed in October, and it is confirmation that this is a Government who are delivering for defence.
Somerset’s defence-related SMEs help to make the south-west the biggest region for defence after the south-east. Will the Secretary of State take a particular look at how SMEs are supporting Somerset Armed Forces Day? They are a backbone of that operation. Will he also look at the fact that Armed Forces Day is run by veterans and volunteers who sometimes do not receive funding until six months after they have held the event, and will he agree to support the biggest Armed Forces Day in the country, which is Somerset Armed Forces Day?
There may be a competition for the title of the biggest Armed Forces Day event in the country—I refer the hon. Gentleman to my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn). I am not sure whether his question was about SMEs or Armed Forces Day events, but I welcome the support that his small firms are giving to Armed Forces Day. From the centre, we are making sure that we can support local Armed Forces Day events where councils and local charities are willing to organise them. We are doing so right around the country, and I know the whole House will back those events, locally and nationally.
Somerset is home to many growing defence sector SMEs, such as Needles and Pins Aerospace in Somerton, which will shortly be opening a new factory in the town. It has been a supplier of bespoke support equipment to Leonardo helicopters for many years. What support is the Minister providing to SMEs such as Needles and Pins to ensure that they can compete for defence procurement contracts?
If the hon. Lady alerts her local small firms to the commitment I have made that next month we will set a target for direct defence investment in SMEs, she will then get confirmation of our commitment to boosting this important area of our economy. She will also recognise that every 1% more of defence spending we put into SMEs is worth £250 million more for those small firms.
Given that at the moment only 4% of defence procurement goes to the SME sector, I very much welcome what the Secretary of State is saying about opening up that scope. Does he recognise, though, that part of the problem with SMEs getting defence contracts is not just the amount of money—although that is vital—but that the procurement portals and processes need to be accessible for smaller businesses with less of a back-room operation than the huge corporations? What can he say about that, particularly given that I represent a constituency in which the entire economy is SMEs?
First, the new SME support centre, which we have announced and will set up shortly, will help with exactly those sorts of challenges. Secondly, the hon. Member is right to point to that low 4% level of direct defence spending into SMEs. That was the level under the last Government, and it went down for every one of the three years before the last election.
On behalf of the official Opposition, we send our best wishes to the Minister for Veterans and People, the hon. Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns), on his ascent of Everest.
On defence procurement, we will all have enjoyed the Red Arrows fly-past as part of our VE Day celebrations, but the fact is that the Hawk jet needs replacing. Given that one of the publicly stated roles of the Red Arrows is “supporting British industry”, will the Secretary of State guarantee that the next jet for the Red Arrows will be designed and manufactured in the United Kingdom?
As a former procurement Minister, the shadow Secretary of State will know that the replacement of our jet trainer is long overdue. He will have heard me say earlier that, for the first time, this is a Government who will look to direct British taxpayers’ defence investment to British-based firms, British-based jobs, British-based technology and British-based innovation.
This is a Government delivering for defence. Today we have agreed a new bespoke and ambitious security and defence partnership between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The SDP will strengthen NATO, the cornerstone of the UK’s defence, and it will grow the economy. It allows us to step up more effectively together on European security against growing Russian aggression and the increasing threats that we face.
The ill-advised decision to leave the EU in 2016 saw us leave the European Defence Agency at the same time. With defence expenditure rising at record rates across Europe in response to the invasion of Ukraine, the EDA has a vital role to play in our national security. What plans do the Government have to secure a more effective working relationship with Europe’s defence procurement strategy and to form stronger links with the EDA?
Quite simply, the answer to both the hon. Gentleman’s first question and his second question is exactly the partnership deal that we have signed this afternoon.
I welcome the news that the UK is deepening defence ties with the European Union, including participation in the €150 billion Security Action for Europe, or SAFE, defence fund. However, given that France has previously said that it wants the UK’s access to be limited to 15%, will the Secretary of State confirm what level of access has been agreed?
This is a big step today—a broad and bespoke agreement between the European Union and the UK on security and defence—but it is a first step. Settling the details and the terms of access for European programmes, including the SAFE funding programme, is exactly the task beyond today.
Before being elected, I was proud to serve alongside our European allies, including French, Dutch and Estonian forces, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. In the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine, it is more important than ever that we build on those alliances to strengthen European security. Can the Secretary of State tell us how we can do more to strengthen European mechanisms for security, such as the joint expeditionary force, to build our collective security?
My hon. Friend is right about the joint expeditionary force, and he is right to emphasise the importance of the step today. While NATO is the cornerstone of our European security—and recognised as such by the European Union in its White Paper—the step today will mean that we will be able to upgrade our co-operation with the European Union on the mobility of military matériel and personnel, on maritime and space security, on irregular migration and on protecting our critical infrastructure. It opens the door to closer defence industrial collaboration, including potential participation in the EU’s €150 billion SAFE arrangements.
Will the Minister join me in congratulating the crew of HMS Dragon, which succeeded in obliterating a supersonic missile with a Sea Viper missile off the coast of the Hebrides? The Royal Navy hit their target thanks to the work of the MOD Hebrides range. Will he also congratulate them on their continued work?
I will indeed. We congratulate the crew of HMS Dragon on their professionalism and skill, and they will welcome my hon. Friend’s championing of that skill in the House this afternoon.
I have previously raised, during Defence questions, my deep concern about the possibility that the Government would give away our fishing rights in order to gain access to the European Union rearmament fund, but in fact it is far worse than that. Is not the truth that we have surrendered our fishing grounds for at least 12 years and will become a passive rule taker, and that all we have in exchange is a glorified talking shop with not a penny of guaranteed defence funding?
The hon. Gentleman is quite right. [Interruption.] He is quite right, in that during the last Defence Question Time he talked about our not being excluded from the Security Action for Europe defence fund that would include EU states. I would have thought that he would welcome this afternoon’s agreement, because this is the open door to those arrangements. Let me ask him this: does he therefore agree with his party leader, who declared before even seeing the agreements that will be signed today—including the security and defence partnership agreement—that she would tear them up?
Earlier this month the nation celebrated 80 years since Victory in Europe Day, and the Government announced the Operation Valour programme, a new UK-wide veteran support system to ensure that veterans have improved access to essential care and support. It is backed by a new £50 million investment, starting this year.
The rights of the charity PTSD Resolution—which provided vital healthcare services in our stretched NHS—to deliver services that imprisoned veterans desperately need have been taken away in England. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how the MOD and other signatories to the armed forces covenant can support the case of veteran prisoners, and to explain why precious support from a charity has been taken away?
We made an election commitment to put the armed forces covenant fully into law, and we will do that. The Minister for Veterans and People is working across Government to ensure that veterans receive the support they need from all services, including Op Nova, which provides for ex-forces people who become caught up in the criminal justice system. I know that I can speak for my hon. Friend the Minister while he is on Everest in saying that he would welcome a meeting with my hon. Friend, and I will ensure that it takes place.
I take it that the meeting will not be on Everest.
The Secretary of State knows as well as I do that one of the most distressing experiences for our veterans today is the fear of being dragged into court in the face of politically motivated prosecutions after the Clonoe and Coagh inquiries, which opened a month ago. Some action will obviously have to be taken to protect them. Is the MOD currently researching the legal, judicial and legislative requirements that are necessary to protect our veterans from this appalling treatment?
The right hon. Gentleman is right. We owe the Operation Banner veterans a huge debt of gratitude. Their professionalism and, in many cases, sacrifices of their lives saved civilian lives and helped to bring about the peace that Northern Ireland now enjoys. In respect of Clonoe, the right hon. Gentleman knows that the MOD is seeking a judicial review of the coroner’s findings, and he will also know that I am working closely with the Northern Ireland Secretary to ensure that the welfare and legal support that we have provided for veterans who are caught up in any investigations is reinforced further so that we can protect this special group of veterans from the impact of such investigations.
A group of Army veterans who feel totally let down by this Government have started a parliamentary petition entitled “Protect Northern Ireland Veterans from Prosecutions”, which has so far amassed nearly 87,000 signatures in just over a week. Assuming that they successfully obtain the further 13,000 that are required, may I ask whether we can then debate, in Parliament, the question of why Labour wants, via its proposed remedial order, to make it easier for Gerry Adams to sue the British Government, while legally abandoning our brave veterans and throwing them to the wolves?
I hesitate to turn this into a party political debate, but the right hon. Gentleman has just done that. He must accept that the previous Government’s woeful legacy Act did nothing to help veterans. It was found unlawful over and over again, and any incoming Government last summer would have had to deal with that legacy, which is what we are doing. I am working with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I am looking to ensure that we minimise the impact of any investigations on this special and unique group of veterans, who served—with great distinction in most cases—to keep the peace, secure long-term peace and protect civilians.
Labour could have appealed those judgments to the Supreme Court but chose not to. Labour MPs and peers have already voted for this barmy process in the Joint Committee on Human Rights on 26 February. Labour will now be expecting all its MPs to vote for it again this autumn. Given that many of the young soldiers who served on Operation Banner in Northern Ireland were recruited from “red wall” seats—from Barnsley to Blackpool, and from Bolton to Burnley—how on earth do this Government expect any Labour MP to do Gerry Adams a favour at the expense of the veterans who opposed him, and then to go back to their own seats and look their constituents, including veterans and their families, in the eye?
The previous Government’s legacy Act has been found to be unlawful time and again. We have to deal with that problem, and any Government would. My concern is for the UK service personnel who served in Northern Ireland over a period of 38 years, who were there to protect the peace, protect civilian lives and prevent civil war. We support anyone who is now caught up in investigations or litigation with welfare and legal support, and I am determined that we will protect them further. I am working with the Northern Ireland Secretary as part of the plans for replacing the legacy Act arrangements, and we will ensure that we discharge our duty to the veterans who have served our country so well.
The Government recognise the important service and sacrifice of those forces veterans who served in Northern Ireland. More were killed during the troubles there than in Afghanistan. I am acutely aware of the anguish caused to those veterans and their families by historical investigations. While the Ministry of Defence continues to provide welfare support and legal support to those affected, I am determined that we will do more.
Operation Banner defeated the IRA militarily and paved the way for the Good Friday agreement, so why are this Labour Government now pushing two-tier justice, to the obvious detriment of our brave Northern Ireland veterans and to the advantage of Gerry Adams and his Sinn Féin fellow travellers? Where is the justice in that?
This Government are dealing with the woeful shortcomings of the last Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. As we do so, we will give priority to strengthening the protections that preserve dignity and respect for our veterans who served in Northern Ireland.
Last year, we pledged to the British public that if we were elected we would seek a new security pact with the European Union. Today we have made good on that promise. The UK-EU security and defence partnership is an ambitious agreement. It will strengthen NATO, and it will grow the economy. In a further demonstration that defence is a powerful engine for growth, I can confirm that Rheinmetall will be opening its new gun barrel factory in Telford, bringing 400 new jobs to the area and boosting investment in the UK economy by nearly half a billion pounds. This is what resetting Britain’s relationship with Europe and stepping up on European security looks like, and this is what delivering for defence looks like, to make Britain secure at home and strong abroad.
Abbey Group in Knowsley partners with Sweden’s Saab to produce the world-class Saab Barracuda camouflage system used by the British Army. It is a prime example of British manufacturing at its best: backed by international collaboration and providing good jobs. However, small and medium-sized enterprises such as Abbey need stability and support. What is my right hon. Friend doing to ensure that they get it?
We have committed to set new SME spending targets and establish a new SME support centre. In the last week, we have launched a new tech scaler, and we will strengthen the SME voice on the new defence industrial joint council.
On the highly topical subject of fishing rights, the Secretary of State will no doubt share my profound concern at reports that last week Mauritius and Russia agreed to deepen their co-operation on fisheries and other maritime issues. Does that not show that Labour’s policy of spending billions renting back a military base that we already own is not only a waste of taxpayers’ money but a major risk to our national security?
No. It shows that when we were elected last summer we inherited a situation of increasing questions and jeopardy over the continuing sovereignty—our operational sovereignty—of the Diego Garcia base. That is why we have been taking action since then.
The Chagos chaos continues, as multiple reports now suggest that No. 10 has put the whole £18 billion Chagos nonsense on hold. It has done that for fear that Labour MPs, who are being whipped to withdraw winter fuel payments from up to 10 million pensioners, will not vote for it. Can the Secretary of State confirm whether it is still the Government’s policy to stand by their crazy Chagos deal, or has he finally decided to give it all up?
The Diego Garcia base is essential to our security and to our security relationship with the US. It was increasingly under threat under the previous Government. We have had to act, as the previous Government started to do, to deal with that jeopardy. We are completing those arrangements and will report to the House when we can.
Last week’s “Panorama” documentary brought fresh allegations of war crimes by Special Air Service and Special Boat Service forces, raising grave new questions about the conduct of the special forces during Operation Herrick in Afghanistan. It also highlighted the vital importance of promoting transparency and accountability across our armed forces. In the light of these developments and the ongoing public inquiry, will the Secretary of State consider looking at how Parliament could scrutinise the work of the special forces?
The previous Government, with our support, set up the Haddon-Cave inquiry, whose job it is to get to the bottom of any allegations and investigate them fully. That is the job it is doing, and it has our full support—and, I hope, the continued support of the House —in doing it. The hon. Lady mentioned the “Panorama” programme. Anybody who is willing to talk to the media about the information they have and what they allege must be willing to do the same to the Haddon-Cave inquiry.
It is simply too early to say that about any of the nations, including all 27 EU nations. What I can say is that today’s agreement is the necessary key that opens the door to that potential for our Government and our defence industry.
If the Government end up paying a fee for British companies bidding for European defence contracts, will they charge the EU a fee when its companies want to bid for British defence contracts?
Any arrangements that we make will be in the best national interests of this country and the interests of our industry. They will be fair, and they will ensure that our UK industry can participate fully in any programmes and make the biggest possible contribution alongside the European Union, within the context of NATO, to making European security stronger.
Will the Secretary of State delay putting before the House the remedial order until he is certain that the Government have a way of delivering the Prime Minister’s commitment to preventing Gerry Adams from claiming compensation?
The right hon. Gentleman is a regular attender in this House, and I suggest that he be here on Wednesday for Northern Ireland questions to put that question directly to the Northern Ireland Secretary.
I reject any accusation of a veil of secrecy. I will look into the allegations that the hon. Gentleman makes, and I will write to him, or can meet him, if that is helpful.
The British defence company Babcock employs over 2,000 people from my constituency. The long-awaited strategic defence review is due any day now, so will the Secretary of State set out how the Government will do more to prioritise British defence jobs, and British firms that will not only provide training and employment opportunities in the UK, but help to develop the vital sovereign capability that has never been more critical for our national security?
We will indeed. We will set out in our defence industrial strategy the detail that the hon. Lady wants. She mentions Babcock, which has welcomed today’s UK-EU agreement as a step forward, describing it as strengthening the critical defence partnership between the EU and the UK in uncertain times. I am sure that she will welcome that as well.
One of Eastbourne’s last surviving world war two veterans, the incredible Eric Deach, celebrates his 100th birthday three weeks today, on 9 June. Will the Secretary of State join me in wishing him a very happy centenary, and thank him for his service to our country?
I would be delighted to, and if the hon. Gentleman would give me Mr Deach’s address, I would like to write to him as well.
I recently dropped in on an Armed Forces Network community event in my constituency, one of many organised by Lee Chapman, a veteran. The network is supported by the council and local volunteers. I have been made aware that there is no official system automatically recording and publishing statistics on veteran suicide in the UK. A petition has been launched, but will the Minister look into that, and see what action can be taken?
I congratulate Lee Chapman on the event that he organised in the right hon. Lady’s constituency. I will indeed look into the matter, and if she has additional data and information for me to go on, I would be grateful if she could let me have it.
The war in Ukraine has shown the importance of drones on the modern battlefield. The previous Government published a drone strategy that was only 12 pages long, and half of that was pictures. They failed to fund UK companies that are investing in, and making, world-leading drone tech here at home. Will the strategic defence review correct that wrong, and support drone development in the UK? [Interruption.]
The shadow Defence Secretary, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), shouts, “Total rubbish,” but his 12-page drone strategy was half-full of pictures and totally unfunded. The strategic defence review will look at how our technologies are changing the nature of warfare, and will ensure that we can make Britain secure at home and strong abroad.
Following the particularly adverse findings against the Special Air Service soldiers in the Clonoe inquest, will the Secretary of State reflect on the fact that better law pertains to inquests in England? In England, when there is a suspicion of criminality, the inquest is stopped, and the matter is referred to the Crown Prosecution Service. In Northern Ireland, however, the inquest reaches highly prejudicial findings, on the balance of probabilities, and then concludes, and there is then a referral to the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland. Would it not be far better to bring the law in Northern Ireland into line with that in England?
The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the Government and the Ministry of Defence are seeking judicial review of the coroner’s work on the Clonoe inquiry. If there are other factors to be taken into account and lessons to be learned, the Government will do that.
Yesterday, a Conservative councillor in my constituency said that the Government were “dancing to the tune of warmongers” because of their support for British defence manufacturing, despite one of those manufacturers being in his ward. Do the Government believe, as I do, that we need to do more, not less, to support British defence manufacturing?
Salute Her, a veterans’ charity in the north-east, does incredible work to support women veterans with specific needs in accessing support. Will the Secretary of State reassure me that women’s voices and needs will be heard and catered for in the upcoming veterans’ strategy?
We are developing the veterans’ strategy in close consultation with veterans and the organisations that represent them. They are at the heart of the process; I can give my hon. Friend that reassurance. I am glad that she is looking forward to the strategy’s publication.
UNCLOS––the United Nations convention on the law of the sea—is an incredible international anti-piracy and anti-drug-running tool, but as the House of Lords discussed in 2022, it needs upgrading to include measures on modern slavery and human trafficking. What work are the Government doing on that in the international sphere?
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising his point of order. I was not aware that he was going to raise it, and I have to say that it is news to me; most regimental associations that I know cannot be pressured by anyone from outside. However, I am grateful to him for raising the issue in the House. Anything that interferes with the parliamentary process is of concern to all Members of the House, and I will certainly look into it and get back to him.
May I say thank you to the Secretary of State for answering that point of order? It saves me from getting involved, but we recognise how important organisations are. Nobody should be stifled.