Mr Paul Foster
MP for South Ribble · Labour · United Kingdom
“If a Home Office official reviewed that in advance and conceded the grounds that were not arguable, it would speed up the decision-making process within the tribunal system.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q You have both been heavily and quite vocally critical of the Home Office—more than any of the other witnesses today. One issue we have is that there is a lot of political pressure, and the country is not happy with the current system and with what is happening, particularly with legal migration—some would say that the lawyers are perhap…”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Jacqui McKenzie: I will just add, in defence of lawyers, that we see stories every now and again of a dodgy practitioner here and there, but the vast majority of lawyers are helping. I have a small team of immigration and asylum lawyers. We do about 20 appeals a year, and 18 or 19 are won in the tribunal.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q On that point, this morning, the Committee heard evidence from a KC, whose name I cannot recall, who said that the Strasbourg court has indicated that it thinks that the UK is not applying article 8 correctly, and is applying it too liberally—that was not his language; that is just the language I am using.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Then people spend another year or two in the asylum system before their appeals are ultimately allowed. Lawyers are actually helping. They are trying to work with the Home Office. There is the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association, which works with the Home Office. There are Windrush groups that work with the Home Office.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q Good morning, everyone. I have a direct question for Vicky, following on from the previous question. In your submission, you welcomed the Government’s objective of creating a fairer and more efficient asylum system, but you raised concerns about several specific provisions in the Bill.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
121 held · 117 searchable for Mr Paul Foster. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“The hon. Member’s new clause proposes a cost-benefit analysis of each bilateral immigration and asylum agreement or arrangement in force. How many individual agreements are we are talking about?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 19 introduces some quite fundamental changes, which I fully support, but is the Minister confident that it will still meet the requirements of the European convention on human rights? That is the litmus test.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister mentioned magistrates. Magistrates are the backbone of our court structure, and they are not legally qualified. Does she agree that there is a huge precedent there and that magistrates do a great job?”
House of Commons13 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Then people spend another year or two in the asylum system before their appeals are ultimately allowed. Lawyers are actually helping. They are trying to work with the Home Office. There is the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association, which works with the Home Office. There are Windrush groups that work with the Home Office. I have been part of it. I worked with former Home Secretaries Sajid Javid and Priti Patel on trying to get things right. It is wrong to blame lawyers. We are doing our job, a job we train for many years to do, and we are trying to help the system. But it is a fact that poor decision making and structural problems around legal aid, which mean that we do not have enough practitioners, or enough high-quality practitioners, are causing a backlog.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Jacqui McKenzie: I will just add, in defence of lawyers, that we see stories every now and again of a dodgy practitioner here and there, but the vast majority of lawyers are helping. I have a small team of immigration and asylum lawyers. We do about 20 appeals a year, and 18 or 19 are won in the tribunal. None of them should have been anywhere near the tribunal. We work to a very high standard of putting in the evidence—the subjective evidence, the objective evidence, expert evidence, all that sort of thing. We do not take cases where we do not think there is a case. We are not bucking the system in any way. It is so frustrating to see those cases get refused by the Home Office, when they ought not to be. There is then the period of scrutiny called the review, and they get rejected there again.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a Home Office official reviewed that in advance and conceded the grounds that were not arguable, it would speed up the decision-making process within the tribunal system. As I have already intimated, if there really is concern that there are not enough sitting judges in the first-tier tribunal, there is provision to expand the eligibility criteria within the initial system. Surely that would be a much more effective and speedy way to address the backlog than creating a whole new body and system, with its own mechanisms and staffing requirements. Although the stated intention of creating this new body is to address the asylum backlog, in reality, as we can see from the terms of the Bill, the true intention is to give the Home Secretary much more control over the operation of the tribunal system than she currently has.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That can be addressed by not having inconsistencies in the rate of initial decision making in the first place; improving the quality of initial decision making within the Home Office, hopefully leading to fewer appeals; making sure that there is legal aid provision for those who are entitled to it, so that they are not wasting time in the tribunal system; and ensuring that the Home Office uses its review mechanism appropriately. I am sure my colleague can speak to this at much more length than I can, but at the moment initial rejection decisions tend to include a large number of copy-and-paste grounds for refusal. When it gets to tribunal, the decision maker has to go through every single one of those grounds, which is incredibly lengthy.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Professor Singer: There are a lot of much more financially effective ways to address the backlog. As was already intimated, a lot of the current tribunal backlog is caused by the fact that initial decision making was paused for a significant amount of time when the Rwanda scheme was being pursued. Once that was opened, there was a huge investment in making a large number of initial decisions on a very quick basis. That was roundly criticised on a number of counts as leading to speed over quality. A number of very poor-quality decisions then went through to the appeal system, leading to the backlog at the initial tribunal system.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q You have both been heavily and quite vocally critical of the Home Office—more than any of the other witnesses today. One issue we have is that there is a lot of political pressure, and the country is not happy with the current system and with what is happening, particularly with legal migration—some would say that the lawyers are perhaps partly responsible for that, but that is a separate debate. You have also acknowledged that there is a huge backlog in the appeals process and that, a lot of the time, that is the Home Office’s fault. The Government are trying to propose an alternative process for that, which you are also criticising. We cannot continue with the status quo, so what would you both advise doing to speed up the process for both the United Kingdom Government and the individuals seeking asylum?”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Mr Speaker, as you are fully aware, we have had over a decade-long campaign to see the full reinstatement of the A&E at Chorley and South Ribble hospital. The public support it, the staff support it, the local NHS trust supports it, and the neighbouring hospitals at Preston, Wigan and Blackburn support it, but NHS England is blocking full reinstatement and will not say why. Will Ministers please meet with local MPs and all key stakeholders to get the A&E at Chorley and South Ribble hospital fully reinstated?”
House of Commons14 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“British Heart Foundation analysis shows that, despite decades of progress, premature deaths from CVD have been rising again for the first time in more than half a century. That should concern every single Member of the House. The cost is not just measured in lives; CVD also has a major economic impact, costing the UK an estimated £12 billion in direct healthcare each year and costing the wider economy about £30 billion. CVD is also a stark reminder of health inequalities in the UK today as well. People in our most deprived communities are still far more likely to die prematurely from CVD than those living in the most affluent areas. That is just not acceptable.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“About 70% of CVD cases in the UK are linked to modifiable factors such as obesity and smoking, alongside manageable risk factors such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes. While I am on the subject of diabetes, it is great to see one of my closest friends, Mr Jared Fox, sitting in the Public Gallery. This is also very personal for Jared, a type 1 diabetic who, back in 2018, suffered three heart attacks linked to his diabetes, resulting in his undergoing a triple heart bypass. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as the saying goes, and Jared is sitting with us now and smiling away, but I believe that, as a diabetic at higher risk, he should have undergone screening, not been left to get almost to the point of dying, unaware of the increased risks that he faced.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am pleased that representatives of the foundation are here with us today, and I thank them all for the crucial support that they continue to champion and deliver day after day. Let me move on to the scale of the challenge that we face. CVD is responsible for about 170,000 deaths each year in the UK—that is more than one quarter of all recorded annual deaths—with one life lost every three minutes. Put simply, while we hold the debate this afternoon, about 30 lives could be lost to CVD—let that sink in. More than 8 million people across the country are living with CVD, with many waiting for vital care, and many more living with conditions that increase their risk of CVD or a cardiac event. Yet much of that burden is not inevitable; it is preventable.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Today is about ensuring that the voices of those living with cardiovascular conditions are heard in the House, but it is also about something even more fundamental. For the first time in more than half a century, we have seen progress on cardiovascular disease moving in the wrong direction. The question before us today is simple: are we willing to accept that, or are we prepared to tackle it? With the right political will and the right action, we can once again make the UK a country in which fewer people die young from heart disease and stroke. The debate also comes at a significant moment for the British Heart Foundation. That charity, which was founded in July 1961, marks this month 65 years of funding lifesaving research.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the matter of reducing levels of premature deaths from heart disease and stroke. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dame Siobhain. I thank hon. Members for attending the debate. Cardiovascular disease remains one of the United Kingdom’s biggest killers and one of the greatest public health challenges facing our country. It devastates families, communities and livelihoods in every corner of the UK. It has touched countless families, including my own. My challenge is not cardiovascular disease but a congenital heart defect— a silent killer that was diagnosed last year following a routine health check. I am still completely symptom-free, but will have to have open heart surgery to replace my aortic valve at some point. I am, however, in the very safe hands of the NHS.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“And fifthly, how will the Government work with devolved Administrations, researchers, charities, clinicians and patients to deliver progress across the entire United Kingdom? The UK has made significant progress on cardiovascular disease before, and we can do so again, but progress is not inevitable. It requires leadership, sustained investment and a laser focus on delivery. This is a pivotal moment, and we should all look to support the Government in their delivery of their cardiovascular ambition and to drive progress in heart health once more. I thank the Minister for setting out for us how the Government will turn their cardiovascular ambition into measurable action, tangible progress and, ultimately, the saving of thousands of lives.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I respectfully ask the Minister not to simply restate the Government’s ambition, but to detail how that ambition will become reality for the 8 million-plus people who are affected daily by cardiovascular disease. Let me ask some specific questions. First, when does the Minister think the modern service framework for CVD will be published? Secondly, how will the Government ensure that the framework is backed by clear delivery plans, accountability and measurable milestones, especially during a time of great challenge and change for the national health service? Thirdly, what action will be taken to improve prevention, early diagnosis and management of major risk factors such as diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and atrial fibrillation? Fourthly, how will the Government ensure that action on CVD reduces health inequalities?”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The remarkable progress made over the past six decades did not happen by accident; it happened thanks to charities such as the British Heart Foundation, great universities, researchers, clinicians and patients, who all worked together to transform outcomes. People like Jared are alive today thanks to research breakthroughs that were once thought impossible. The life sciences sector plan recognises the UK’s potential to be a world leader in research and innovation. Cardiovascular health must be at the heart of that ambition. From artificial intelligence and technology that can prevent and enable early diagnosis to the development of cutting-edge treatments and medicines, the United Kingdom has an opportunity not only to improve outcomes here at home, but to lead the world in tackling cardiovascular disease.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This debate is also an important opportunity to press the Government on what the framework will contain, how it will be implemented and whether it will deliver significant improvements in prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care. Although the framework will focus on England, the challenge of CVD knows no borders. This is a UK-wide challenge, and the lessons, opportunities and ambitions that we discuss today must resonate across all four of our nations. Let me move on to the role of research and innovation. If CVD is one of our greatest challenges, research is one of our greatest opportunities.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree. If we could get fresh food to more of our communities and young people, it would have a massive positive effect on dealing with CVD—that must be dealt with. This debate could not be more timely. The Government have rightly identified CVD as one of the UK’s biggest killers, and have set a welcome ambition to reduce premature deaths from heart disease and stroke by 25% over the next decade. Parliament has a responsibility not just to welcome those commitments, but to scrutinise how they will be delivered. The forthcoming CVD modern service framework for England, which Ministers have said will be published soon, presents a rare opportunity to reset our approach to heart health, but the real question is whether it will be equal to the scale of the challenge before us.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Finally, I thank the British Heart Foundation—please keep up the good work—and I thank you, too, Dame Siobhain, for giving up your time to chair this afternoon. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the matter of reducing levels of premature deaths from heart disease and stroke.”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for giving me 50 seconds. This is one of those very rare topics where we have cross-party consensus from every party in the House: we all want the Government to be successful in what they seek to achieve, reducing deaths from stroke and cardiovascular disease by 25%. I thank the Minister for a very detailed response. I also thank the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew) for giving up his time and again giving a very detailed response. I thank the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) and join in the tributes to his wife Olivia. I thank all other Members, and I thank Jared for sharing his story with us; he is now in Hansard .”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is a passionate advocate for the Ribble Valley in Lancashire. Does she agree that Lancashire has missed out on millions of pounds of investment because the likes of Manchester and Liverpool have been prioritised and because we have not had a fully functioning combined authority?”
House of Commons17 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On transport and infrastructure, we are all aware in Lancashire that if we could have investment in a second bridge across the River Ribble linking the M55 and opening up Blackpool airport, and linking it with the M6 and the M65, we could have huge opportunity, but the Government, the Green Book and the Treasury do not seem to want to recognise or support that. Does my hon. Friend agree?”
House of Commons17 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Leyland Trucks is now the only heavy goods vehicle manufacturer in the United Kingdom, and it is based in my constituency. Is it Government policy that we should be buying British? Does the Minister agree that the Government should support any orders for trucks through Leyland DAF?”
House of Commons17 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Mr Speaker, integrated care boards have a statutory obligation to fully fund all essential medicines and pharmacy provision for the delivery of specialist end-of-life and palliative care at our wonderful hospices, such as St Catherine’s and Derian House, serving our respective constituencies of South Ribble and Chorley. However, this is not happening, with ICBs claiming that the costs are covered by the hospices’ core grant. Will the Prime Minister support my private Member’s Bill—St Catherine’s law—which seeks to place an explicit obligation on every ICB to fund all essential medicine and pharmacy provision for all our hospices, separately from any core grant they receive from the NHS?”
House of Commons10 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is critical to point out that this debate is not just about funding, but the programmes being funded. We must get those programmes right and fit for future needs. In my constituency, many thousands are employed at BAE Systems in Warton and Samlesbury. They are working diligently to ensure the Typhoon jet remains fit for the future, and the collaborative combat aircraft—also known as the autonomous jets programme—will secure thousands of jobs in the future and keep our country safe. Does the Minister agree that we must ensure the DIP is right, not rushed?”
House of Commons10 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Cost of living, cost of living, cost of living—those are the three words that my constituents in South Ribble and the small area of Chorley that I represent contact me about every single week. They do not contact me about the Westminster bubble and process. Will the Chancellor please assure me that she will stay laser-focused on delivering on the cost of living for the constituents of South Ribble and will not allow the noise and disruption from the Opposition to put her off?”
House of Commons28 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“After the destruction of Gaza and the deaths of in excess of 72,000 Palestinians, it is evident that the Israeli Government have turned their attention not only to Lebanon and Iran, but also to the west bank. In the west bank there are now daily reports of extreme violence and death, as well as the forceful eviction of Palestinians and the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements. That is not only immoral, but yet further evidence of illegal Israeli Government-sponsored activity. Does the Secretary of State agree that the violence in the west bank must stop immediately, as must the continued expansion of illegal settlements? Can she assure the House that despite the continuing conflicts in Ukraine, Lebanon, Iran and Sudan, the Government are very much still focused on Gaza and the west bank?”
House of Commons21 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Would the right hon. Gentleman update me on where he heard that the Government have any intention whatsoever of withdrawing the HM forces or HM veterans railcards? I have a veterans railcard, and I have not seen any evidence anywhere that there is an intention to withdraw them.”
House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to our armed forces as a global laughing stock, is that perhaps because of—we had this debate in the Chamber yesterday—the inheritance his party’s Government left: no ships, no aircraft and the lowest number of British troops since the Napoleonic wars? Does he concede that one of the problems with delivering the DIP is that appalling inheritance?”
House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can provide a real-world example of how ludicrous the current system is. A friend of mine joined the Paras, completed P company, served with the Paras, smelt the coffee, and joined the REME and transferred to the Royal Engineers. He served for about 12 years in colour service and left. Within a year of leaving, he wanted to join his local reserve infantry unit, which said that it would accept him only if he did full reserve basic training. I take it that this legislation will prevent that nonsense in the future, because it seems ludicrous.”
House of Commons16 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Minister agree that we must understand that we inherited an MOD procurement system in disarray, unfunded defence programmes, an Air Force without enough aircraft or helicopters, a Navy without enough ships, and an Army with a low—Napoleonic—number of troops? We face wars in the middle east and Ukraine. We are working with an exceptionally challenging situation, and we must get this right. Please do not allow the Opposition to rewrite history.”
House of Commons15 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I find this a fascinating debate because we can all see the meaning of the amendment, but the hon. Gentleman mentioned victims. If he recalls, we all visited the Defence Serious Crime Command and the victim support unit, and it was made clear that the victim support service has made some real improvements over the past few years. In any crime investigation that is transferred from the service justice system to the criminal justice system, the victim support unit cannot support the victim. That is a concern to me, and it was raised with us. Does the hon. Member agree that is a considerable concern that we should look at?”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the majority of courts martial involve non-commissioned individuals? Although senior commissioned officers are subject to court martial at times, they are in the minority. The majority are non-commissioned officers.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The independent defence housing strategy team looked at the issue of a defence housing association, and said that “transfer outside the public sector to a housing association or other private sector structure is not appropriate. It would be most likely to set back the renewal of the estate, increase costs of delivery and hamper operational effectiveness of the Armed Forces.” Was the right hon. Member aware of that?”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We approach the anniversary of the Good Friday agreement, which was historic in that it ultimately delivered peace for a generation. With the knowledge that it requires constant political co-operation and public support, its biggest challenge no doubt is the Tory-Reform policy of leaving the European convention on human rights. If the UK left the ECHR, that would undermine a core principle of the agreement. Does the Secretary of State agree that there are some within this Chamber who would wholly compromise the peace in Northern Ireland for short-lived, ill-judged political gain?”
House of Commons25 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that we may be jumping the gun slightly? The covenant’s statutory guidance will explain in detail what due regard means in practice.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does my hon. Friend share my concern that, with this amendment, we run the risk of creating a minimal requirement that organisations may seek to meet, without going any further, thus undermining the delivery and service of the covenant for our veterans?”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On this Committee, we have veterans and former council leaders, and I am both. One of the main reasons for all the changes being made in the Bill is a recognition that, historically, the covenant has not been delivered appropriately by local authorities. However, does the Minister agree that there is evidence that it has significantly improved recently, and that including Op Valour will take that improvement a step further?”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is it not the case that a civilian family who lived in Wiltshire and moved to Yorkshire would face exactly the same challenges as the service family? The covenant is about service personnel and families not being at a disadvantage compared with their civilian counterparts. Actually, they are already not at a disadvantage because both are dealt with in exactly the same way.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My understanding is that new information is coming out daily and that other current Members of this House may or may not be directly linked to the Epstein-Mandelson scandal. Does my hon. Friend agree that they should be fully investigated as well?”
House of Commons4 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Under the previous Government’s unlawful Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, the Police Service of Northern Ireland was required to shut down more than 1,000 investigations, including 225 investigations into the deaths of soldiers and veterans. Will the Secretary of State please assure the families of murdered British armed forces personnel that, should they wish to approach the reformed commission, it will consider their case and may be able to provide them with the answers that many of them have long sought?”
House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Last month, the House debated the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, and we heard many moving contributions about the devastating loss experienced by families, including military families, many of whom are still seeking answers. Does the Secretary of State agree that the voices of those the Government’s legislation is for should be at the forefront of our minds when we debate it and every time we debate it?”
House of Commons17 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is the difference between the soldier and the terrorist.” We must also understand that it is not just British service personnel who were granted immunity from prosecution under the previous legislation; it was also terrorists who murdered civilians and British servicemen and servicewomen. More than 200 investigations into deaths of Operation Banner soldiers were shut down upon the enactment of the legacy Act, against the wishes of those soldiers’ families. Immunity from prosecution is dangerous, because it invalidates the justice system, sacrifices victims’ rights, weakens deterrence, violates international law and undermines long-term peace and trust in our institutions. I will never agree that immunity is the appropriate solution. It sets an awful precedent.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The three veterans commissioners in July said: “This is not a call for immunity from the law, but for fairness under it”. Ben Wallace, the former Defence Secretary, said that the British Army is “not above the law.” Brigadier John Donnelly, who served in Northern Ireland and is now chair of the Centre for Military Justice, said only last week: “You cannot have a system of law that applies to some groups and not to others. It is vital that soldiers operating in support of the civil powers are held fully accountable to the laws they are required to enforce.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There are many separate elements of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, but I will keep my contribution to two specific areas: immunity from prosecution for historical crimes, and the concerns of my fellow veterans moving forward under the new legislation. As a veteran, I have never sought or agreed that, as a British serviceman, I should ever be permitted immunity from prosecution for my actions during service. We work within the law of armed conflict, the Geneva convention and the laws of the United Kingdom when serving here, to name but three. We are trained to undertake operations within strict legal protocols, whatever the provocation we are experiencing or the hostile environment we are in. There has been much opposition to the immunity offered within the legacy Act.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of those, 121 were republican terrorists, 101 were loyalist terrorists, and the remainder were all civilians. We therefore have a duty to ensure that all legacy issues arising from the troubles are dealt with compassionately, diligently and legally. The previous Government’s legacy Act has been found to be unlawful by both the High Court in Belfast and the Court of Appeal. The High Court found several provisions of that Act to be incompatible with the European convention on human rights, and it was therefore deemed unlawful. It also found that it was incompatible with article 2 of the Windsor framework and should therefore be disapplied. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, and also found additional aspects of the legacy Act to be incompatible with the ECHR.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The peace process in Northern Ireland was hard-won, and tough compromises had to be accepted by all parties. The Good Friday agreement was never going to have the wholesale support of all, but it brought about an end to the horrendous violence. However, it did not include a mechanism for dealing with unresolved killings during the troubles—either by terrorists or by the security forces—and nor did it provide an amnesty for crimes that had not yet been prosecuted. Let us also not forget that, according to data from the House of Commons Library, around 3,520 people lost their lives during the troubles. They included 1,441 British service personnel, 722 of whom died at the hands of paramilitaries. Three hundred RUC officers were killed, and 301 individual deaths were the responsibility of the British military.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have plenty of views on that, but it does not change my view on immunity. I believe immunity is wrong, particularly for soldiers. Moving on, I understand the concerns of my fellow veterans that any investigations into historical deaths have previously disproportionately focused on the actions of the armed forces and former police officers, rather than the paramilitaries. The Government have recognised that and introduced a number of key protections for anyone asked to provide information. Those include protection from repeated investigations, a right to stay at home, a right to anonymity, protection from cold calling, protection in old age and the right to be heard.”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗