Support for Veterans
Wednesday, 21 October 2026
Contributions
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)Reform UK
4. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans and their families in Northern Ireland.
Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)Labour
7. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support Northern Ireland veterans.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)Labour
9. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans who served in Operation Banner.
Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)Labour
10. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans who served in Operation Banner.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)Labour
12. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans who served in Operation Banner.
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Chris Bryant)Labour
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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)Ulster Unionist Party
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?
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)Independent
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?
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)Democratic Unionist Party
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?
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)Conservative
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 SpeakerSpeaker
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.
← Previous
Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023: Replacement
Next →
Speaker’s Statement
Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 5421808.