Al Carns
MP for Birmingham Selly Oak · Labour · United Kingdom
“It would be politically very difficult and legally painful, and indeed it would lead to questioning the reputation and moral compass of successive Irish Governments.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for giving way. The reality is that, across the conventional force, we have seen an uptick in recruitment and a reduction in people leaving due to retention issues. It is the first time in 10 to 14 years that we have seen an increase—it is a huge success.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“After enough years have passed, those findings start to become the history of the conflict. I do not believe anybody in this Chamber intends that to happen—I genuinely do not think that is the case—but intention is not really the point. We need to look at where the system we are building eventually takes us.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, I also know veterans who have lived for years with the possibility that somebody will reopen an event that has already been examined, sometimes more than once—in many cases more than once. Many of those people are now very old men, and we cannot keep pretending that endless process is the same thing as justice.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for the intervention, but when the records exposed threaten either national security or individual security, we must take that into account.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have found the conduct of the debate, today and yesterday, deeply encouraging. It has been thoughtful and meaningful, and the passionate speeches that we have heard have informed my insight and understanding in respect of Northern Ireland veterans and of all the other issues.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,179 held · 636 searchable for Al Carns. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 10.
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.
“As Members may recall, this matter was debated during the passage of the Renters’ Rights Act, and Ministers at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government set out why the decent homes standard cannot sensibly be applied to single living accommodation. Such accommodation exists to support operational readiness and cannot be treated in the same way as social housing or other forms of civilian housing. Single living accommodation spans a huge range of types, many with shared facilities, and therefore, by definition, some parts of the decent homes standard would be difficult to meet.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If it is any consolation, I lived in single living accommodation for a large chunk of my life and have seen the good, the bad and the ugly, so I will personally be behind that work to ensure we get the best standards. New clause 1 is designed to include single living accommodation within section 101 of the Renters’ Rights Act. It would require the Ministry of Defence to report annually to Parliament on the extent to which such accommodation meets the decent homes standard. As someone who has lived in single living accommodation for a huge chunk of my life, I appreciate the sentiment behind the new clause, but the Government do not believe it is the right way to drive up standards in single living accommodation.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely accept that. There are just nuances and differences in the requirements, and that will be reflected in the outcomes of both reviews. Again, I offer that engagement—if the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells would like to get involved and ensure that his points are made as the strategy is built, he can affect the output as required. The Government believe that a dedicated focus on the Defence Housing Service and family accommodation is the best way to achieve the step change needed for defence, specifically on family homes. We will continue simultaneously to drive up the standard of single living accommodation, and further detail will be set out in the next steps following the ongoing SLA review.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Gentleman to talk through how we can work collaboratively towards the best solution for defence personnel. The review is the right vehicle for this work; it is targeted, expert-led and focused on the specific needs of those who serve. Our commitment is simple: we will deliver safe, comfortable and well-maintained accommodation for our service personnel, taking into account the unique nature of service as a whole. I hope that reassures the Committee. On that basis, I ask the hon. Gentleman not to press amendment 2 or new clause 1.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I make it clear that we are not talking about amending the Renters’ Rights Act; we are talking about the Armed Forces Bill, but I am happy to take this offline and talk about the nuance between the two if required. We need to be clear that this does not mean we are complacent about the condition of single living accommodation—far from it. We are committed to driving up the quality of single living accommodation across the entire estate and ensuring that people get the experience they deserve if they are to serve on the frontline. The Minister for Veterans and People has commissioned an independent review and is working on it now, and the single living accommodation piece should be complete by the summer. I will strongly recommend that she engage with the hon.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The board will include a family representative, alongside the service family involvement in the wider governance, to ensure that the Defence Housing Service is held to account by not only those with appropriate expertise but the families that it has been set up to serve. Given its importance, it is right that ministerial reporting be held at Secretary of State level, rather than with the Minister for the Armed Forces. I was responsible for the delivery of the strategy, but housing is not necessarily within my portfolio. Given the clear and comprehensive arrangements I have outlined, the amendment is unnecessary and I urge the right hon. Member to withdraw it.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Defence Housing Service will remain accountable to Ministers through that board and via departmental sponsorship and arrangements, alongside increased reporting to Parliament on its performance, as set out in the Bill. The DHS will continue to work closely with departmental teams, which will be covered in the MOD framework document in the usual way. It will be operationally independent, within the scope of the framework document and the legal powers in the Bill. Critically, for its day-to-day activities, the organisation will be accountable to an expert, independent board, which will be appointed by the Secretary of State.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The governance of the Defence Housing Service has been carefully set out to provide the right balance between independence, accountability and ministerial oversight. For the organisation to deliver its objectives, it must operate alongside strategic oversight by the Department, including accountability to Ministers and Parliament as a whole. Under established arrangements for arm’s length bodies, arrangements that operate across Government, responsibility for overseeing performance sits with the body’s board, with the chair acting as the principal interface with Ministers. It is critical that the chair is the principal interface with Ministers, reducing the ability of anyone to filter or taint any reports as they come up and through.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 16 would require that the chief executive of the Defence Housing Service reports directly to the Minister for the Armed Forces, which is my current role. In the way it is written, it would confuse accountability in the Defence Housing Service, undermine the role of the board in particular, including the role of the family representatives, and risk duplicating lines of ministerial accountability that are already set out in the Bill. From my perspective, when we have an issue, in defence or in any organisation, it is down to either a lack of understanding, command or control or a lack of accountability. I want to ensure, and reassure, that when the board reports on the Defence Housing Service and its deliverables, it is unfiltered and untainted as it hits ministerial offices.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Defence Housing Service will be accountable to Ministers. It must have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State and comply with the terms of the framework agreement entered into with the Secretary of State. Forces families have previously been let down by homes that are not fit for purpose; we are determined and focused on delivering that. A new set of military housing standards that are fit for service family life will be established, including the decent homes standard, which the Defence Housing Service will be required to meet, under the terms of the framework agreement. The Defence Housing Service will lead the renewal and development of military homes across the United Kingdom, while unlocking the potential to deliver 100,000 homes of all types on developed MOD land.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The clause confers on the Defence Housing Service the functions of “improving the supply and quality of defence housing,” the management, regeneration or development of land used for defence purposes and “supporting in other ways— (i) the creation, regeneration or development of service communities, and (ii) the continued wellbeing of those communities.” To fulfil those functions, the Defence Housing Service will be empowered to generate income from property and to manage land on behalf of the Secretary of State and others. It may enter into contracts, buy and sell property, borrow money with Treasury approval, provide financial assistance and form partnerships or joint ventures. It will also have compulsory purchase powers to acquire land for any purpose connected with its functions.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 3, together with schedule 1, creates the Defence Housing Service, a new public body dedicated to improving the supply and quality of defence housing and spearheading the regeneration of defence communities. Our Defence Housing Service sets out a vision for the future transformation of military homes, 90% of which will be upgraded, renewed or rebuilt through a record £9 billion investment over a decade. The Defence Housing Service is the vehicle to drive that transformation.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The board of the Defence Housing Service will be accountable to the Secretary of State. I will not go into the detail of the NAD’s bonuses and how they are credited in the Bill, because they are not related. That renewal will not only benefit the country as a whole in delivering against wider Government housing and economic growth targets but follow a “forces first” principle, prioritising current and former military personnel wherever possible. The Defence Housing Service will transform military housing, improve quality of life for service families and ensure that Defence housing is finally properly managed in a professional and efficient manner.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the question of accountability, the board will report directly to the Secretary of State. There will be no filtering and no taint on any information coming up. Therefore, I do not necessarily agree with the premise of the hon. Gentleman’s intervention. I will address new clause 7 in my closing remarks.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We must also bear in mind that we have more throughput in the armed forces than probably any other organisation or housing association in the country.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is worth noting that, while there were a plethora of strategic issues during covid, the previous Conservative Government did not adopt the totality of the “Stick or Twist?” report produced by the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford, although it contained valuable points. A housing association model would jeopardise the close working with the military that is essential to ensuring appropriate operational capability. It would also put at risk the Crown basis on which personnel occupy their homes. Crown immunities allow the Ministry of Defence to move personnel at pace, without some of the regulatory constraint that we would have otherwise, which is vital for operational effectiveness.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The independent strategy produced prior to the establishment of the Defence Housing Service was exactly that: it was independent, and it took a huge amount of advice from a variety of people. Most importantly, the families federations fed into that process and ensured that their voices were heard. The quote highlighted by my hon. Friend the Member for South Ribble was only reinforced by the oral evidence given by Natalie Elphicke Ross OBE, when discussing the strategy review in response to the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley. The view was firmly held throughout the entire review that the housing association model was not the right approach, and it was not included in its recommendations.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am absolutely confident in the Defence Housing Service, and the strategy review comprehensively looked at single living accommodation and family accommodation, and we are putting them on the right track to deliver significant change. It is not lost on me that the drafting system in the military can put an undue amount of pressure on individuals; I have been on a satellite phone to my children on their birthdays in the middle of all sorts of carnage, with helicopters burning and turning in the background, or with incoming rounds in Afghanistan. It puts exceptional pressure on families, so the ability to return to a safe and secure place is the least that we can provide.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One of the reasons we are heading in the right direction is because I genuinely believe that our armed forces personnel can see that we are doing the right thing, particularly with accommodation. The right to a family life is one of the critical components of anyone serving, and that looks like safe, secure, warm and dry accommodation, whether single living or family accommodation. To give a small example, I went through marine training in 1999, and the accommodation in which I was housed was still in place in 2024, when I came back to be the unit’s commanding officer. In 1999 it was terrible, and in 2024 it was unworkable. We need to get after those accommodation issues and put them right.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New clause 7 would require there to be a feasibility study when establishing a forces housing association, but before I go into the detail, I will reflect on some of the comments made by the right hon. Member. Recruitment and retention are intrinsically linked, as both the Government and the Opposition acknowledge. We have introduced lots of changes in recruitment and retention over the last year and a half, but there is much more to do. While it differs across the services, overall we are seeing a 13% uptick in recruitment and an 8% reduction in outflow, which is the first time we have seen a change in direction for 14 years. There is much more to do, but we are heading in the right direction.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That welfare-based discretion is a cornerstone of armed forces culture, and moving housing management to a third-party provider could put it at risk, undermining this vital welfare function. Finally, the planned housing renewal programme demands very close working relationships with military commands to ensure that it supports operational effectiveness rather than undermining it. Such close collaboration is not realistically achievable through a private or third sector body.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Perhaps that is why we are not taking it forward now. Furthermore, the Ministry of Defence heavily subsidises rents. There have been suggestions that the Defence Housing Service could borrow private finance off the balance sheet if it was a housing association rather than a public body. However, expert advice from the Treasury, the Cabinet Office and others confirms that is not the case. The exclusivity of the defence housing purpose and the scale of MOD payments mean that such financial arrangements are not feasible. Equally important, and close to my heart, is the welfare of service personnel and their families. Evidence presented to the defence housing strategy review team revealed that local commands exercised significant discretion to support personnel in a plethora of difficult circumstances, such as bereavement.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is some confusion here. The Minister for the Armed Forces does not deal with the housing, the people or the welfare; he deals with the operation and policy output. There is a clear understanding of that. Amendment 16 refers to “ the Minister of State for the Armed Forces”. That is the wrong role, so the amendment is wrong. Let us just stick to the point. The board itself will be accountable to the Secretary of State. That is the cleanest way to provide a sharp and crisp command and control model, and to allow the Secretary of State to make sure that the board, which has family members on it, provides the best service. Let us not misunderstand some of the ranks, roles and responsibilities within defence. Question put and agreed to. Clause 3 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons26 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The most recent Armed Forces Act was the 2021 Act, which provided for annual continuation in force of the 2006 Act by an Order in Council, but not beyond the end of 2026. That means that this Armed Forces Bill must receive Royal Assent before 14 December 2026. Clause 1 replaces section 382 of the 2006 Act with a proposed new section 382 that provides for the 2006 Act to be continued until the end of 2031. It provides specifically for the 2006 Act to expire one year after the Royal Assent of this Bill, but it also provides for it then to be continued annually—rather than expiring—by an Order in Council up to, but not beyond, the end of 2031. As a consequence of clause 1, section 1 of the Armed Forces Act 2021, which inserted existing section 382 and the expiry date of 2026 into the 2006 Act, is repealed.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. This clause is an essential part of each and every Armed Forces Bill, as it provides for the Armed Forces Act 2006 to be renewed for a further five-year period. Without it, the 2006 Act would expire on 14 December 2026. For constitutional and legal reasons, an Armed Forces Act is required every five years. That requirement for Parliament’s agreement for continuation has its origin in the Bill of Rights of 1689, which provides that the raising of a standing army is against the law unless Parliament consents to it. Primary legislation, an Armed Forces Act, is therefore required every five years, this one to renew the 2006 Act to provide for the armed forces to be recruited and maintained as disciplined bodies.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will triple down on what was said and say thank you very much to an amazing team, first, for putting together great evidence sessions and, secondly, for approaching this in a positive and pragmatic way. I also thank the Opposition parties for also being pragmatic in the way we move this forward in the best keeping of our armed forces. Question put and agreed to . Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill . Clause 2 Armed forces covenant”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford and the hon. Members for Exmouth and Exeter East, for Solihull West and Shirley, and for South Northamptonshire, for amendment 8, which seeks to define “due regard” in the Bill. I recognise their intent, their positivity and their commitment to the covenant, but I cannot accept the amendment. The amendment is unnecessary because due regard is a long-established legal concept that public bodies already understand and routinely apply in practice. The existing covenant duty of due regard is already driving positive change in its current areas of housing, healthcare and education.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree, and I am one of the biggest champions for shouting about the postcode lottery in the delivery of the covenant. Putting that in the Bill would not change it. It requires education, communication and, in a lot of ways, internal support within local authorities to deliver it. The hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East mentioned the lack of skills at local council level—that is the problem. It is not necessary to amend the Bill; the statutory guidance will be absolutely clear and concise on what the covenant means.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Rayleigh and Wickford has examples of where that local connection requirement has not been removed; if he does, I ask him, please, to highlight them to my office so that we can take them on and deal with them, because we removed the requirement last year. Our experience of the public sector equality duty also shows that a duty of due regard, when properly supported, is sufficient to drive lasting cultural and organisational change, but I do accept that this is the first step to moving in that direction. In addition, the covenant’s statutory guidance, which we can scrutinise in due course, will include a dedicated section explaining what due regard means in practice, including the key issues faced by the armed forces community that bodies must consider.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Prioritising veterans in a very narrow, bounded line above those individuals may skew a whole list of requirements and needs across other public services, hence my point about communication and education, and then the yearly accountability in line with the covenant, which is critical to ensure a level of accountability. Government Departments are also demonstrating how covenant considerations are driving change in practice. For example, this Government have gone further than before by removing local connection requirements for access to social housing for all veterans. I would be really interested if the right hon.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree with the premise of the hon. Member’s point. Where I disagree is in how local authorities may view that and how it may restrict their ability to deliver services across other requirements, in line with local priorities. In my letter to the Committee, I wrote: “When developing the Armed Forces Covenant Legal Duty, due regard was deliberately chosen to bring about lasting positive change…whilst at the same time retaining some flexibility for public bodies to make decisions that are right for their local context and circumstances.” That is really important, because some of our constituencies will have different levels of need compared with others. Some may have large veteran populations; others may not. Some may have a large number of cancer patients, for example.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The second thing, which will really change things over time, is the Valour programme, under which local field officers will help communicate and educate on compliance with the covenant over time, and help those councillors who perhaps do not understand it to deliver in line with it more effectively.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While I may not have served in local government, I absolutely acknowledge that we drown in bureaucracy across the UK. I would say that, compared with primary legislation, a councillor is far more likely to listen to and acknowledge an individual who has experience of armed forces service and who tries to enforce, educate and communicate the requirement to comply with the covenant. There are two things that are going to bring about change. The first is armed forces champions across local councils, who do a fantastic job. They can be paid and there are no terms of reference; the role has not been standardised.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for his service, both in the military and in local government, and as an armed forces champion. The honest reality is that as the duty is broadened from three areas to 12 plus two, local councils will be held to account to deliver for the armed forces community—and not just for veterans, but for families and others. The statutory guidance will be really clear. Combine that with field officers, under Op Valour, holding councils to account, with clear terms of reference that are standardised across the UK, and I think we will see a massive improvement in services, not just for veterans but for the broader armed forces community.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Empowering armed forces champions is not necessarily the solution; unfortunately, whether we like it or not, armed forces champions differ between councils. I am not an expert, as some members of the Committee are, but I have travelled to many local councils and seen where it works exceptionally well. For example, in Manchester, armed forces champions are paid and employed by the council and have clear terms of reference. Other areas do not even have armed forces champions. To deliver the most consistent change, the solution is not necessarily to empower armed forces champions but to provide a set of terms of reference for the accountable individuals in councils to uphold the covenant and support veterans, across the entire nation, in line with the Valour programme.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree. The reality is that the implementation of the covenant has been really narrow, across three different Departments. The Bill will broaden the number of policy areas it covers to 12 plus two, which will put an onus on councils and allow people to hold them to account on delivering in line with the armed forces covenant. That is a positive step in the right direction. When we combine that with Valour over time, starting small and broadening out, we will end up with a data-based solution that ensures that councils can support their armed forces community in a more effective and balanced manner. A definition of due regard in the Bill risks being overly narrow and could unintentionally limit how bodies apply it in practice.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When it comes to the legal process, we must ensure that there is the flexibility in local councils to adhere to the covenant in line with the broader issues and capacity that they may have to deal with. Some council areas have a huge number of veterans, and others have very few. Many councils, including mine in Birmingham, have a huge housing problem. Should we prioritise a single mum with a child, or a veteran? If we made that too explicit, we would skew how local councils view veterans and the armed forces as a whole. That is quite dangerous.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I disagree—the postcode lottery will get better and start to standardise over time. There is a multitude of problems with the covenant that the Bill will try to solve, one of which is education, and communication to our own armed forces personnel about what it is and what it is not. That is a problem for the Ministry of Defence, which we are taking forward. A definition of due regard in the Bill risks being overly narrow and could unintentionally limit how bodies apply it in practice. I talked in my letter about flexibility, which is critical. Due regard is about informed decision making. It may involve training staff and putting mechanisms in place to ensure that decision making includes concise analysis of how decisions might impact members of the armed forces community.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While I recognise the importance of consistent and reliable access to public services for the armed forces community, again I respectfully cannot accept the amendment. A national protocol setting out standardised procedures and expectations could create a minimal level of requirement that organisations might seek to meet without going any further. It therefore risks unintentionally limiting the steps taken by those organisations to support the armed forces.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The public sector equality duty has been in force for 15 years and its duty of due regard is working well; we seek to replicate that as we move forward. From my perspective, the amendment risks constraining rather than strengthening that approach. As I have said many times, this is a step in the right direction. It broadens the policy areas covered by the covenant, which is a fantastic step and should be seen very positively across the armed forces, their families, our veteran community and the bereaved. I thank the hon. Members for North Devon and for Tunbridge Wells for amendment 5, which proposes a statutory requirement for the Secretary of State to “prepare and publish a national protocol for consistent access to public services” for personnel and their families.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The minimum requirement at the moment is to stay in line with the covenant principles. That needs to be balanced with the broader local issues that each local authority is facing. That will never be standardised because our local communities are different, from Cornwall to the north-east, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This is the harsh truth of the postcode lottery: the covenant will broaden out to a variety of policy areas but the way to solve its implementation is through communication and education, rather than tying ourselves up in bureaucracy and legislation.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Therefore, further expectations are unnecessary. This guidance ensures that the needs of the armed forces community are properly considered, while allowing for local discretion and responsiveness. Furthermore, transparency and accountability are maintained through the armed forces covenant annual report, which monitors progress and highlights areas for improvement. In summary, mandating a national protocol risks imposing unnecessary rigidity and could limit the ability of public bodies to respond effectively to local circumstances—a point that I keep coming back to. We believe the current approach strikes the right balance between consistency, flexibility and accountability. I hope that reassures hon. Members, and I ask them not to press amendments 8 and 5.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree that we must make a more conscious effort to ensure that the covenant is understood by those serving, those who have left, and importantly—perhaps in some cases more so than for any other group—the families of veterans or of those serving. There is a huge amount of support out there, but it is often untapped because of the lack of education. The legal duty is set up so that bodies can make decisions that are right for the local context and circumstances, including the devolved Governments. I would argue that a one-size-fits-all approach could inadvertently hinder tailored solutions that best meet the needs of armed forces personnel and their families. Instead, the covenant duty is supported by robust statutory guidance that acts as a clear point of reference for public bodies.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely agree. I served for 24 years, and I did not know what the covenant was until I left and became the Minister for Veterans and People. That is the honest reality. I am sure that others who are serving also do not know what the covenant is. There is an educational requirement within the military, but also—I say this ever so gently—they are so focused on their operational roles and responsibilities that they are not necessarily interested in what comes next, or in understanding the benefits of the covenant to their families and loved ones while they are serving, which is a crying shame.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The MOD is also working with the Department for Education on the Best Start in Life programme and family hubs, providing integrated, accessible support from pregnancy onwards. Guidance to help the hubs to support service families effectively is expected this spring.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A central part of this work is developing digital, streamlined plans that can be easily transferred, reducing delays during moves. In England, local authorities already have a statutory duty to manage and transfer education, health and care plans when a child moves between areas. The Ministry of Defence has been fully engaged with the Department for Education’s consultation on SEND reform, highlighting the importance of minimising disruption to service personnel and families and ensuring quicker access to support in new locations. Reforms under consideration by this Government include digital EHCPs and individual support plans, which go a long way towards sorting out some of the bureaucracy, and are designed to support smoother transitions for highly mobile children.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Each nation operates a distinct statutory system for identifying need, assessing children and delivering support. Imposing a legal requirement for portability across those frameworks risks creating delay, duplication and additional bureaucracy for some families. The more effective route is continued joint working with bodies in scope, building on the existing protections that are already provided by the covenant. The duty requires public bodies to consider the specific impacts of service mobility, including for children with SEND, and to ensure that support remains responsive as families move. The Government are already taking significant steps in this space. The Department for Education is consulting on SEND reforms that explicitly recognise the challenges faced by service children.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The objectives of the amendment are therefore largely met through existing statutory guidance and NHS policies, which provide a more flexible and effective framework for supporting armed forces families. Generally, the difficulties and complexity of triaging patients across devolved Governments, different NHS trusts and secondary care are not lost on me. Separately from discussing the amendment, I would welcome a discussion with the Minister for Veterans and People about how we can continue to improve the existing process. I understand the positive and forward-looking intent behind the amendment. Amendment 11 seeks to mandate the transfer of special educational needs plans between the devolved Governments. While well-meaning, that approach is unlikely to work in practice.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Wales and Scotland have today confirmed that following the cross-border work that has been led by the Government, they are actively considering updating their policies to better reflect cross-border arrangements and the maintenance of waiting times. The current approach is based on close co-operation between the MOD, NHS, devolved Governments and local health bodies, supported by the armed forces covenant duty, rather than by rigid primary legislation. That allows for locally tailored solutions that respect clinical priorities and patient safety and avoid unintended consequences, such as disruption and delay. Extensive consultation and co-operation with devolved Administrations and stakeholders is essential to maintaining effective healthcare provision, and that could be undermined by prescriptive regulation and unrealistic deadlines.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It delivers bespoke pathways for the armed forces community, such as Op Restore and Op Courage, and it has a central armed forces commissioning team, which works to retain NHS waiting-list positions where clinically appropriate. I have met them, and they are exceptionally proficient at what they do. In addition, existing programmes and ongoing electronic record integration already address many of the challenges associated with frequent moves and continuity of care, without the need for additional statutory requirements. A clear example of that collaborative approach is the work that is under way with the devolved Administrations.”
House of Commons24 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗