Ian Roome
MP for North Devon · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“I thank the hon. Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing this important debate. I want to speak up for Ilfracombe in particular, and the challenges that will be familiar to coastal communities everywhere. Devon county council has identified Ilfracombe as one of the most vulnerable towns in Devon.”
“I have spoken with local business owners who pour their hearts and souls out into Ilfracombe trying to make things better, and the very last thing that they need is a hatchet job in the national press. Just yesterday, it was reported that a local teenager, Bradley Blackmore, bravely rescued another boy from drowning. Well done, Bradley.”
“This August, a daring soapbox derby will again raise thousands for charity, and I am proud to say that Ilfracombe has just been shortlisted for the first ever UK town of culture awards, one of only 15 towns in the country on the list.”
“The review rightly placed at the heart of Britain’s future military capability the digital targeting web—the system that links sensors, commanders and weapons into one integrated force that can identify a threat and destroy it.”
“I certainly do, and I will come that later in my speech. There are areas where the Government seem to have cut corners: munitions reserves, medical support, industrial resilience—all essential for enduring a longer crisis. Professionals talk logistics.”
“I agree with the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and I thank him for his distinguished service too. We are seeing that in how we are learning lessons from Ukraine. I have been out there and seen the systems, so I totally agree.”
The complete record
Every one of 210 lines we hold for Ian Roome, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“This August, a daring soapbox derby will again raise thousands for charity, and I am proud to say that Ilfracombe has just been shortlisted for the first ever UK town of culture awards, one of only 15 towns in the country on the list. I ask the Minister whether the Government will consider re-inventing the coastal communities fund or coastal revival fund for the new generation. How should we talk about challenges without damaging the reputation of coastal towns that deserve our help? How do we deliver what the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) called “good growth in every postcode”?”
“I have spoken with local business owners who pour their hearts and souls out into Ilfracombe trying to make things better, and the very last thing that they need is a hatchet job in the national press. Just yesterday, it was reported that a local teenager, Bradley Blackmore, bravely rescued another boy from drowning. Well done, Bradley. Ilfracombe can boast award-winning manufacturing businesses and several promising new housing schemes supported by North Devon council and the Ilfracombe Community Land Trust, delivering safer social housing for local people. Every year, crowds flock to Ilfracombe for the maritime festival.”
“I thank the hon. Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing this important debate. I want to speak up for Ilfracombe in particular, and the challenges that will be familiar to coastal communities everywhere. Devon county council has identified Ilfracombe as one of the most vulnerable towns in Devon. Its remote location leaves it badly cut off from wider public services, economic opportunities and emergency intervention. That pattern will be all too familiar for those in this room. What I can never accept are shameless articles, such as the one recently published in a national tabloid newspaper that I will not name, punching down at Ilfracombe. Trashing a small town’s reputation for clicks is not journalism; it is monetising misery and it is not fit for tomorrow’s fish and chip paper.”
“The MCA has told MPs that it has data to back its claim that CROs would rather be volunteers than employees. Can the Minister confirm that those findings can be shared? This has a massive bearing on the MCA’s decision, and may greatly undermine the essential lifeline that CROs provide to coastal communities like mine in North Devon.”
“The review rightly placed at the heart of Britain’s future military capability the digital targeting web—the system that links sensors, commanders and weapons into one integrated force that can identify a threat and destroy it. The defence investment plan commits money for our armed forces to do more, but too much of that funding is still on the other side of 2030. The Prime Minister has said that NATO could face an attack from Russia before 2030. Yesterday, Lord Robertson and General Sir Richard Barrons pointed out to the Defence Committee that many of the capabilities deemed urgently needed in the SDR are only due to arrive at the end of a nine-year investment cycle. An example is air and missile defence, where the scale of the £790 million investment falls short of what was planned and arrives years down the line.”
“The SDR set out the right ambition: a more integrated force, a more digital force and a more resilient Britain, ready to learn lessons from Ukraine and the middle east. The defence investment plan accepts that analysis, but next comes the hard part: not only recognising the problem but solving it. Does the plan move quickly enough to make Britain safer? I fear it does not. We lost nearly a year waiting for the defence investment plan to be published. Months of hesitation when industry held its breath, investments stalled, contracts went unsigned and momentum was lost. The SDR talks of mobilising “rapidly in the event of a crisis”. If only that sense of urgency were reflected in government. Capability delayed is capability denied. The pace matters as much as the decision.”
“I thank my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) for securing this debate. There are moments in politics when delay is not just a mistake, but a danger. This is one of those moments. The truth is that the world has become more dangerous much faster than Britain has become ready. The strategic defence review mattered because it stripped away comforting illusions. From the end of the cold war, we enjoyed a peace dividend that offered more security and more money for public services, but war has returned to Europe. Hostile states challenge us daily with cyber-attacks and sabotage, flouting international law and the liberal rules-based order. The absolute supremacy of the western alliance is no longer absolute.”
“I certainly do, and I will come that later in my speech. There are areas where the Government seem to have cut corners: munitions reserves, medical support, industrial resilience—all essential for enduring a longer crisis. Professionals talk logistics. In 1940, Sir Winston Churchill appointed Lord Beaverbrook to rapidly streamline aircraft production. Lord Beaverbrook responded by throwing out all the old rules and doubling production output inside 12 months. His sayings have become famous, describing the factories as the frontlines of the war. He said: “Organisation is the enemy of improvisation”, “Committees take the punch out of war,” and “The need is great, the time is short, urgency must be the watchword.” He sounds like a nightmare to work for, but he helped rescue this country in an hour of great crisis.”
“We must preserve the peace previous generations sacrificed so much to secure. Let this House be remembered not as the House that scrambled in an emergency, but that saw the danger coming and acted.”
“I agree with the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and I thank him for his distinguished service too. We are seeing that in how we are learning lessons from Ukraine. I have been out there and seen the systems, so I totally agree. Defence reform is a very important element that the MOD should look at, and I am sure the Minister will have something to say about that. I cannot find that spirit of urgency that Lord Beaverbrook showed in 1940 in the defence investment plan. The purpose of rearmament is not to prepare for war; it is to prevent that disaster, to deter aggression and to bolster our allies. As Liberal Democrats, and I am sure across the House, we believe Britain’s security depends on our alliances. A stronger Britain means a stronger NATO. A safer Europe means a safer United Kingdom.”
“The defence investment plan includes an additional £100 million transformation of the Royal Marines commando forces, with a special focus on our allies in Scandinavia and the High North. As the Royal Marines Commando Logistic Regiment is based at RM Chivenor in my constituency, will the Secretary of State tell us what form that transformation will take?”
“The Defence Committee has just come back from Norway. It worries me that some defence programmes may be withdrawn in the DIP. Does my hon. Friend agree that the defence programmes set out in the defence investment plan are important for not only our national security but maintaining and deepening the UK’s relationships with our allies and partners?”
“This year, two of Devon’s school food providers have shut down due to rapidly rising business and food costs. The Government school food standards consultation closed on 12 June, so will the Secretary of State now ensure that funding for school meals is sustained and that procurement supports healthy, fresh and local food?”
“We should not let everything that is happening in Westminster today distract us from the urgent need to safeguard our national defence. New clause 22 would highlight the result of the defence investment plan being long overdue. Does my hon. Friend agree that our understanding is that we still expect the defence investment plan to be delivered before the NATO summit and before the selection of a prospective new Labour Prime Minister?”
“It is a big misconception that single living accommodation in the forces is primarily for those who are single; it is not. Even at the flag-raising ceremony here in Westminster today, most of those in uniform told me that their wives live in a different part of the country, and they are living in single living accommodation. They are not living in family accommodation, but they do have families. Does my hon. Friend agree that, with this investment, we should be upgrading single living accommodation, too?”
“First of all, I would like to say what a great honour it was to attend Windsor castle on Friday to see the presentation of the new colours to the Royal Marines. It was an absolutely superb event and carried out to extreme precision. It has been reported that the Ministry of Defence is considering delaying or scrapping plans for the Type 83 destroyer, the long-term replacement for the Type 45, due in the 2030s. If that is the case, will the Minister confirm what alternative the Government will review to ensure the future of the Royal Marines’ anti-aircraft and anti-missile defence?”
“That is something that I believe this Government are attempting to do, as we saw on our visits as a Committee. As such, this Armed Forces Bill should amend the phrase “service family accommodation” wherever it appears in relation to the standard of forces housing, so that it also covers single living accommodation and any Ministry of Defence building being used for that purpose. Why should those serving who are single be treated any different from those serving who choose to be with their families? The Armed Forces Bill will have united support from parties across this House, and so should new clause 13. I urge the Government to be bold, to accept no half-measures and to deliver decent housing for every member of our armed forces.”
“I speak from personal experience, having lived in single living accommodation myself as a still-wet-behind-the-ears young airman posted to Braunton block at what was then RAF Chivenor in North Devon in the late 1980s—it is now RMB Chivenor, a Royal Marine base. The nicest way I can describe that accommodation is to say that it was basic, but before family life happened, it was home to me and my mates for at least the two years I was at Chivenor. My room on that base is still there, and whichever Royal Marine has it today has every right to be housed somewhere without mould or damp while they serve King and country. We must ensure that by the time the next armed forces Bill comes before this House in 2031, the shameful findings of the last service accommodation report are a thing of the past.”
“In 2021, the Public Accounts Committee estimated that the latter may support as many as 80,000 people, more than half of our armed forces personnel. At that time, more than a third of armed forces personnel were believed to be living in the poorest grade of service housing, and 3% in accommodation so poor that they were exempt from paying rent. Section 101 of the Renters’ Rights Act misses out single living accommodation, despite many new recruits being young and too much of the defence housing estate being in a shocking state of repair. New clause 13 is our opportunity to begin to fix that.”
“Not everyone chooses to be in a relationship, and many live in single living accommodation away from their wives and go home at the weekend, so sometimes they are there for their whole career, not just as a stepping stone until they find a partner and move into quarters. The Secretary of State has promised “the biggest renewal of Armed Forces housing in more than 50 years.” I echo his words—the least British forces personnel deserve is “a decent home”. Last year, the Government rightly agreed with our party that armed forces housing should meet the decent homes standard, and it was encouraging to see that commitment make its way into the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. However, there are two types of armed forces housing: service family accommodation and single living accommodation.”
“It was a pleasure to be a member of the Select Committee on the Armed Forces Bill, and it is an honour to speak on the Armed Forces Bill for a second time. It is to the Government’s credit that the responds to a number of the key challenges that our armed forces face in the 2020s. However, today I want to argue the case for new clause 13, which addresses the need to give every member of our armed forces a safe, decent home whatever their family circumstances. That is something the Liberal Democrats pushed for in the Select Committee, and it is a cause that is very close to my heart. Some who serve live in single living accommodation for decades—for their whole career.”
“I know that everybody here, and the nearly 500 people from my constituency who signed this petition, will be struck by the gravity of the terrible crimes that are being committed up and down the country. Does the hon. Lady agree that, when justice is delivered only years or even decades later, we should all be asking uncomfortable questions about what might be happening on the streets today in our own constituencies, however difficult that is?”
“Following the recent challenges with deploying HMS Dragon to the middle east at short notice, will the defence readiness Bill, which was mentioned in the strategic defence review, urgently review how our Type 45 destroyers can be made more readily available to defend against aerial attacks?”
“One of my constituents in North Devon is a Royal Marines veteran who was just awarded over £2,700 in backdated universal credit, after the DWP failed to disregard his war pension from his monthly income. What can be done to ensure DWP staff understand armed forces pensions? Will the Minister assure hon. Members that this is not happening to other veterans across the country?”
“Lost medical records have been the focus of veterans’ campaigns, such as those launched by the UK nuclear test veterans, who say that decades-old records of blood and urine samples taken during the 1950s nuclear tests may have been actively withheld from service personnel to avoid liability over radiation-related illnesses. The new clause would recognise that a service career can be dangerous, so timely transfer of a copy of a person’s medical records at the end of their service should be standard procedure.”
“Under the new clause, the form those service medical records take would be specified, as is now common with data disclosure, to make health information transparent and accessible. The new clause would also create a formalised handover process for all physical and mental health records to a civilian health body, such as the NHS, as already defined in the Bill in proposed new section 343AZB of the Armed Forces Act 2006. Disclosure would happen with the person’s consent in a structured way, which would help to ensure better awareness of their service history during their future healthcare.”
“I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. New clause 3 would place a statutory duty on the Secretary of State to ensure that all service personnel leaving the military receive a complete copy of their medical records within one month of their discharge date. The one-month timeframe would create a hard deadline, and it would align the provision of records with their completing their registration with a GP. The new clause would apply in respect of all regular and reserve personnel and ensure that detailed medical records are made available after discharge, to both the individual and the relevant health body.”
“The new clause would create a deadline and shorten the timeframe. The Minister has just said that some complicated cases can take up to three months, but it is probably those cases that need the urgency of a 28-day timeframe. I know that in future it may all go digital, but at the moment we cannot confirm that, and I get some really serious and difficult cases in my constituency casework. Does the Minister therefore agree that we really need to improve the timeframe to 28 days?”
“I put it on record that I am a holder of a veterans railcard. Many of my constituents have veterans railcards and, with the cost of living crisis, they find it a great way to move about. Does the hon. Member agree that we really need to continue with the veterans railcard?”
“We feel that section 65(2) should specify that, in addition to the recall provision not applying to anybody over 65 or beyond 18 years after discharge, the exclusion should recognise a medical exemption as standard procedure. That would apply to a medical discharge from either the regular or the reserve forces, closing off the possibility that an individual who might otherwise be medically exempted would be targeted for recall because of their previous service. The mental health element is particularly significant, given the well-documented prevalence of conditions such as PTSD among veterans, at nearly double the rate of the adult population. This amendment would avoid doing harm to vulnerable individuals, as well as removing the need for the armed forces to go through the process of ruling someone not fit for service a second time.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Amendment 1 would introduce an exemption from recall to former service personnel who have been discharged due to physical or mental health reasons, to ensure that, even as the Bill seeks to make it easier to recall reservists in times of urgent need, those with long-term injuries or other serious medical conditions can be automatically screened out. Currently, clause 33 updates section 65 of the Reserve Forces Act to alter the terms under which a former serviceperson can be recalled to include reserves, specifying time periods in relation to re-enlistment and tidying up certain terminology.”
“In the words of Lord Robertson, we are underprepared, underinsured and under attack. We are not safe. Britain’s national security and safety is in peril. I have asked over six times when the defence investment plan will be published. I now know the answer: “We are working flat out”. Will the Minister give me a timeframe? What is “working flat out”, and how long does it take?”
“(3) In this section— “relevant civilian police force” means the civilian police force for the area in which the alleged offence took place; “relevant offence” means— (a) any offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, (b) an offence involving domestic abuse within the meaning of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, or (c) an offence of attempting or conspiring to commit an offence within sub-paragraph (a) or (b). (4) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify further offences which are to be treated as a relevant offence for the purposes of this section.” This amendment requires the Service Police and the Defence Serious Crime Command to refer all allegations of sexual offences and domestic violence to the civilian police forces for investigation and subsequent trial in the civilian justice system.”
“I beg to move amendment 6, in clause 12, page 29, line 6, at end insert— “115C Duty to refer sexual offences and domestic abuse to civilian police (1) This section applies where a service police force or the tri-service serious crime unit is made aware of an allegation that a person subject to service law, or a civilian subject to service discipline, has committed a relevant offence in the United Kingdom. (2) The Provost Marshal of the relevant service police force, or the Provost Marshal for serious crime, must immediately refer the allegation and transfer the investigation to the relevant civilian police force.”
“Transferring that role to independent civilian police would remove the risk of a conflict of interest that can happen when the military investigates itself. In the shocking case of Royal Artillery Gunner Jaysley Beck, who tragically took her own life in 2021, the coroner ruled that the sexual harassment she had suffered should have been referred to the police. The Ministry of Defence aims to see the percentage of women in our armed forces increase from 12% to 30% by 2030, and independent police investigation of sexual crimes would help to rebuild trust and accountability. Under subsection (3), a “relevant offence” would be committing, attempting or conspiring to commit an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 or an offence involving domestic abuse as defined by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021.”
“This amendment would insert an additional section requiring the provost marshal to refer all allegations of sexual offences and domestic violence to the relevant civilian police force. That is important because, although cases involving this kind of accusation may be heard faster under military investigation, many fear that these cases continue to be adversely influenced by the close-knit community within the armed forces and by the military chain of command. It was a recommendation of the 2021 Atherton report, in which more than 2,000 female service personnel and veterans said that they had been victims of bullying, discrimination, harassment or sexual assault during their service in our armed forces. Some reported a culture where cases are minimised, evidence is lost and perpetrators are protected.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Amendment 6 would introduce a requirement for the service police and the Defence Serious Crime Command to refer all allegations of sexual offences and domestic violence to the civilian police forces for investigation and subsequent trial in the civilian justice system. Clause 12 currently inserts into the Armed Forces Act 2006 a new section requiring the Secretary of State to issue a “service policing protocol” to co-ordinate the work of the Defence Council, each service police force and the tri-service serious crime unit. That provision aims to better co-ordinate those organisations’ vital work and to protect against improper interference in their criminal investigations.”
“I will withdraw the amendment, but I ask that the Minister takes on board the comments made by the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley in his powerful speech, so that this can come out on Report. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment , by leave, withdrawn. Clause 12 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 13 Entry for purposes of obtaining evidence etc Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
“It is not addressed in the amendment, but we heard evidence that those with years of military service and a lot of experience could be used on the panels too.”
“It is difficult to find officers of an equivalent rank, particularly among the higher ranks, who have not served or trained together or do not know each other, and to be sure that they do not have any relevant interest in protecting someone or perverting the course of justice. The right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford also made a good point about who constitutes the panel. I support amendment 9, because what is the point of our going on visits if we do not act on what we have been told is an issue? We also heard a point that has not been mentioned today, which is that those in the non-commissioned ranks, such as warrant officers who have 25 or 30 years’ experience in the job, could also sit on the panels.”
“It is important that we take on board the evidence from our visits. Otherwise, what is the point of going on them? That point was brought up when we debated a previous amendment, with reference to the use of the civilian or military justice system. The hon. and gallant Member for Solihull West and Shirley made an excellent speech about using retired officers. We heard from those who are recruiting that there are delays. We heard during a visit that a senior officer had struggled to find a panel, and the process had been delayed because permission from the then Secretary of State was needed to use an officer of a lower rank. We also heard that it would be much easier to find officers.”
“The Minister mentions that there are 200 officers at one star and above. Does he have the facts on how many of those 200 one-stars do not know one another?”
“Back in February, former Royal Navy officers and other expert witnesses warned the Defence Committee that although tapping an undersea cable is very difficult, they are vulnerable to sabotage, and more than three quarters of the UK’s natural gas is imported via undersea pipelines from Norway. Given Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, does the UK not need to press ahead faster with the Atlantic Bastion initiative? In light of recent defence budget pressures, can the Minister confirm whether funding levels are adequate to maintain long-term submarine detection and tracking capabilities?”
“I would like to draw the Committee’s attention to the Defence Committee report on the armed forces covenant, which is based on evidence from witnesses. It says: “As the current duty of ‘due regard’ is inconsistently interpreted, the extended duty must be accompanied by clear guidance so that the duty is clearly understood and is not treated as a tick-box exercise.” It goes on to say: “We heard many examples where the Covenant was not working as designed, resulting in people who have served being financially disadvantaged, unable to access medical care, or unable to find an appropriate school for their children as a result of their service.” That was all due to the wishy-washy interpretation of due regard.”
“I fear that some might see it just as a paper exercise. That could be unfair on armed forces personnel in some parts of the country, but would make life especially hard for those being reposted every two years. For example, Devon has one, two or three overlapping levels of local government, depending on where someone lives. Our NHS hospital trusts, police, fire authorities and other services have different boundaries too. The problem of a postcode lottery was identified as a weakness in the original covenant. If someone is in uniform, they could easily be reposted from a big city to RAF Lossiemouth or RNAS Culdrose—a completely different kind of community. The Defence Committee’s report on the armed forces covenant found that some councils have priority housing rules for veterans, while others still require a local connection.”
“It is nice to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Amendment 5 would add a new section to the armed forces covenant provisions that were introduced in the Armed Forces Act 2006 to try to make access to services more consistent. This Bill requires specified persons to have due regard to the covenant for specified matters, such as the fair provision of childcare, healthcare and social care, housing and other services listed in clause 2. Some of those specified persons are national bodies, but others are local authorities, educational bodies and health bodies, many of which are much more localised. Without a national benchmark for supporting armed forces families, we risk that due regard to the covenant will still be interpreted in very different ways by, say, neighbouring local councils.”
“That would be fairer to our service personnel, but it would also make the Government’s responsibilities clearer—it would end our discussion now, where we are asking what due regard means—if local bodies fail to uphold what is being asked for in the Bill. The amendment would require a standardised set of protocols to be produced by the Secretary of State within six months of the Bill passing, require local bodies to act accordingly, and require the protocols to be brought back to Parliament when the procedures need to be revised.”
“I totally agree with my hon. Friend. Published guidance can be interpreted differently from authority to authority. It is about how they put that into action. Local NHS services have a mad patchwork of transfer rules depending on where someone moves from across the country, which can make access to medical care difficult, as I am sure some of us have experienced—I have, because I have a large garrison in my constituency, and I receive casework from serving personnel about the difference that they have experienced around the country. That is part of what we are trying to fix. We should expect the Secretary of State to put specific protocols in writing for local bodies across the country.”
“I was a local armed forces champion. I was in local government for 22 years and ended up being council leader before entering this place. I can tell the Committee that, in practice, I was going around and screaming my head off to make sure that people were listening but, as it was not mandatory, they could just refer to due regard and make their interpretation of the guidance. I was a local armed forces champion for eight years, right up until I entered this place in July 2024, and I struggled to get veterans the help they needed. I just want the Minister to take that on board.”
“We heard in the Defence Committee that a lot of people currently serving in the armed forces have never even heard of the armed forces covenant; they do not know what it is. We are discussing how to educate the public, but a lot of people serving have never heard of the armed forces covenant. Does the Minister think that the education needs to start within the Ministry of Defence on how it handles the armed forces covenant?”