Helen Maguire MP: speeches 2024

Speeches

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I have a few questions. Colonel Doherty, you have travelled throughout the world during your career. You have been to Yemen, Kuwait, Afghanistan and various other places. How do you see the commissioner reaching military personnel serving in other parts of the world? Col. Darren Doherty: The legislation is clear where access is permitted and enabled. It will be a challenge where matters of operational security come into it, but I think all those are manageable. Again, it is about the framework of how the office will operate—it will need to be right where it is needed. My experience of operations, going back to my previous experience, but close to my heart, is that welfare is a chain-of-command business. It is what officers, senior non-commissioned officers and junior non-commissioned officers get paid to do. I am always minded that they often do that best on operations. I would hope that the commissioner’s role would be less needed in operations, but that is yet to be proved by evidence or experience. I would hope that we get on with that better there than perhaps we do in some of the quieter, peacetime locations.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q We would all like to see a strong and independent commissioner—a real champion for the armed forces. What certainty can we gain that the Secretary of State’s powers, as set out in the Bill, will not undermine the commissioner’s independence? Luke Pollard: We have deliberately drawn the powers to be quite limited. The Secretary of State can restrict access only on national security grounds or where there would be a danger to a person. The example that might work there is visiting the frontline during combat operations. There would clearly be a danger to our people if there were to be a formal visit, and there would probably be a danger to the commissioner in that situation. That gives a prudent safeguard power. We have deliberately tried to separate the powers that might normally exist for the Secretary of State from this role so that there is more independence for the commissioner. By establishing a novel route to Parliament, we have also provided Parliament with greater ability to raise any concerns. If the commissioner encounters any difficulties with interactions with the Ministry of Defence or other providers of services for our people, they are able to raise that in their reports. Those are then given to Parliament to be able to independently scrutinise, separate from the MOD. What we have tried to do is to separate those functions out. I think we have succeeded in doing that in the Bill. The style of how that will happen in practice will depend on the person appointed to the office and how that office is established. However the principle of impartiality and independence from the Ministry of Defence—and, importantly, from the single services—is at the heart of this legislation. The legislation is designed to build trust, so that people can go to the commissioner if they want to raise a concern.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q One final question, if I may. The chain of command has been raised quite a few times by different individuals and in questioning. How do you see the commissioner interacting with the chain of command in practice, to ensure that it is successful?

• 10 Dec 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. One in four people of working age in the UK has a criminal record, for a variety of reasons. Most of these people no longer pose a threat to society, but are still tied to their past by their criminal record and face a lifetime of barriers with employers. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that the criminal record implications of a sentence do not impact on an individual disproportionately?

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q What do you think the commissioner could do in advance to support personnel as they are serving, to help prevent some of the issues that we then see in veterans? Is there anything in the Bill that will help with that? Angela Kitching: Some of the issues that Ted has raised about discharge are massively important throughout somebody’s career. How somebody leaves the armed forces is crucial to their ongoing experience in life. In terms of what people raised during our focus group sessions, housing issues are key. Good transition around housing makes a huge difference. Healthcare and education access for family members is a hugely important issue. If you look at the families continuous attitudes survey and the armed forces continuous attitudes survey, the two main opinion-based surveys, issues around family and the extent to which family have access to outside services are key concerns of serving personnel. I understand that those issues will not directly be in the purview of the commissioner but, as part of building relationships, decent healthcare access at discharge, support for family members in accessing local services, and housing are the three things that I would really focus on.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q We briefly touched on family. It would be really interesting for the Committee to understand what you class as family, given that nowadays families come in all different shapes and sizes. Could you help us understand what your thoughts are on that? Angela Kitching: Obviously, there are family members—and, from our point of view as a charity, we have a definition of beneficiary that would mean that there was a degree of dependency between the family member and the person who had served, or the serving person, or somebody who is bereaved of somebody who was in service. In the real world, though, there is often a much wider group of people who feel most relevant to the person who was serving. That could well be the household that they came into service from; it could be the family that they left behind when they came from another country to serve on our behalf; it could be their grown-up children; or it could be the group of people who immediately surround them and offer them support. The issue is about trying to make sure that, as you are peeling back the layers of the onion, it is the people who are closest to the person who are serving, but not just their immediate household. If you think about the person who they live with, it might be much more relevant to also think about their parents. At the moment, a large number of non-ranking people in service are typically passing through service between the ages of 18 and 30, so they often do not have other immediate spousal relationships. It is their parents or grandparents, whose household they have come out of, who are closest to them.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Given that SSAFA is such an old charity, you will have seen that the needs of military personnel have changed over the years. What do you think that will mean for the role of the commissioner? Lt General Sir Andrew Gregory: The needs of people who come to us are absolutely changing. I have been the chief exec of SSAFA for eight-and-a-bit years, and we have seen a significant change even during that time. The people coming to us are younger, and not just because the world war two and national service generation are slowly passing on, sadly. More working-age veterans are coming to us, and there are more complicated, multifaceted issues. I say that one or more of the d’s has gone wrong in their lives: drink, debt, drugs, divorce, depression, domestic violence, a dependency culture, digs or housing, disease, death, or disability. It will not be all of them—I will test you on them later—but it will be more than one. To take it back to your first question, our people are taking each case on its merits and looking at it. The commissioner will need to understand that, in terms of service families and service personnel, the cases will be different, and he or she will have to pick that up.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Would you rather see a broader principle of inclusion rather than exclusion when we are defining family members, so that people do not feel excluded from the process? Angela Kitching: Yes; and it is about where somebody can offer relevant information to the matter under consideration. It is about how much relevant information they could have. However, it is worth thinking about how to challenge the commissioner’s outreach into countries that a person has come from—where that information might be held, for example. Unless there is an active outreach into those immediate relationships, I think people naturally think, “Well, I am not in country and therefore I won’t be able to offer my views on this process.”

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you for coming. General Gregory, the armed forces are a tri-service, and there are slightly different cultures within that, and the Gurkhas as well. Do you feel that the role of the commissioner needs to be adapted slightly, in order to be trusted by service personnel? Lt General Sir Andrew Gregory: You are absolutely right. We are all part of the armed forces but we are quite different as tribes, and then within the Army we have sub-tribes called regiments, and they are pretty different too, each with its own traditions and culture, and things like that. Then you have the Brigade of Gurkhas, with which Nick has served very closely, and which has a wonderful tradition and history. How do you capture all that? We do it within SSAFA. We support the whole community. How do we do it? We take the case of each person and each family on its merits. We support 2,000 Gurkha families each year. The support we provide to them is quite different from the support we provide to some of our other beneficiaries. I am flannelling a bit but, to answer your question, I think the commissioner will need to be sufficiently knowledgeable about the armed forces so that he or she understands the various components of how they live their lives. As I am sure many of you know, Navy personnel have traditionally lived their lives—this is a generalisation—in different ways from the Army. The Navy serviceperson goes to sea and their family stays static, perhaps around Portsmouth, Faslane, Devonport or near their own family. The Army has traditionally had more camp followers, and families have moved as the regiment has moved. That means it is very different, and it puts different pressures on both the serviceperson and their family. The commissioner will have to get his or her head around that.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q You touched briefly on trust; it is really important that armed forces personnel should be able to have trust. How do you think the commissioner can be presented in such a way as to gain the trust of military personnel? Angela Kitching: Independence is really key. It is really important for personnel to able to see that the chain of command are listening and taking action as a result of the commissioner’s report. To be honest, the key thing is that the reports are seen to have impact—they should be reporting not just on the flow of cases and the themes that have come out but on what has happened as a result. That is really the issue at the moment, I feel: people can see that their individual complaints have got so far but cannot see whether there was a wider impact on the system or whether anything was changed as a result. I am hoping that the parliamentary element will add that additional layer of transparency and trust. One other thing: people talked about being able to raise concerns anonymously, understanding that that meant they would not then personally get feedback on what had happened. But they were very keen on a system that would allow them to raise those concerns, in the manner of Crimestoppers—when you can give information in detail but that does not come directly come back to you as the person who raised it.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q General, from your past experience with the ombudsman service, what would be your biggest ask of the commissioner in their new role? Lt General Sir Nicholas Pope: If the commissioner is going to be shining a light on the current welfare conditions of the armed forces community, in a way that enables Parliament to have the evidence for a sensible discussion about the way in which the Ministry conducts its business and makes its choices—about resource allocation, policy formulation and service delivery—then, to have proper teeth, I would want to see, within three, four or five years, some tangible changes in either resource allocations or the metrics that are coming back through the commissioner to Parliament. Unless we see that, there will be no real impact or effect out of creating the post. To get real teeth, we have to have the feedback loop that Andrew talked about, in a way that matters.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q One final question. The Bill makes no reference to the armed forces covenant. Do you think it should? Angela Kitching: I have not considered that directly. I understand that there is consideration of the extension of the covenant in law. It is really important that we do not tie ourselves to the current legal definition, which is much more limited in the policy areas that it looks at. But anything that demonstrates that the covenant is the promise that the nation makes would be really useful. Among employers, in the healthcare system and in local authorities, it is beginning to be the golden thread that runs through the promise that is made. Anything we can do to strengthen that will be helpful, but I would not want it to be too limited by the current narrow definition of the covenant in law.

• 3 Dec 2024 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  We are watching with grave concern the most recent developments in Ukraine, and the attacks on its energy networks at the weekend show that Putin has no concern for non-combatants. The use by Russia of a hypersonic missile and the alleged change in Russia’s nuclear doctrine are clear efforts to intimidate Ukraine’s partners. Does the Minister agree that we must stand firm in our support for Ukraine? President-elect Trump has said that he will end the war within 24 hours, and Vice President-elect Vance has said that Ukraine must give up its territory in negotiations, but ceding any territory will only give the wrong signal to other autocratic regimes around the world. We must urgently repair our broken relationship with our European allies to ensure that we act united in support of Ukraine, regardless of Trump’s potential actions. What is being done to strengthen the UK’s commitments and contribution to European collective security to support Ukraine? We support the Bill to release the interest on frozen Russian assets that are held in the UK to help Ukraine, but will the Minister commit to work with allies to mobilise the principal, not the interest, on more than $300 billion of assets, so that there is a plan B if America withdraws financial support?

• 3 Dec 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. The owner of Horton pharmacy in Epsom has raised concerns about the financial burden that increased employer national insurance contributions will place on community pharmacies. Pharmacies provide frontline care, and without support, their viability and the accessible healthcare that they offer could be at risk. That will add pressure to an already strained national health service. Will the Chancellor reconsider and exempt community pharmacies from the increase?

• 28 Nov 2024 · Pakistan: Freedom of Religion · Hansard source

  More

  I also have a number of Ahmadiyya Muslims in Epsom and Ewell, and it was really shameful that this faith group had to move its home to the UK to avoid exactly this persecution. Does my hon. Friend agree that all religious groups in Pakistan should have the freedom to practise their faith, and that we in this House should be a voice for the persecuted?

• 25 Nov 2024 · Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  There is an independent school in my constituency, Kingswood House school, which has around 50% of its pupils with special educational needs. Many of those pupils do not have an education, health and care plan. Does my hon. Friend agree that schools providing support to so many SEN children should retain their charitable rate relief?

• 19 Nov 2024 · Ukraine: 1,000 Days · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of the statement. I join Members from all parts of the House to mark 1,000 days since Putin’s forces commenced their illegal full-scale invasion of Ukraine. On behalf of the Liberal Democrats, I pay tribute to the brave people of Ukraine, including those fighting on the frontline in defence of the democratic ideals that we share; those fighting the nightly terror of Russian missiles and drones, which continue their assault on innocent civilians; and all the Ukrainians who have sought safety here in the UK. I am hugely proud of British families who opened their doors to Ukrainians in their moment of need. A few days ago, I visited the charity Surrey Stands with Ukraine, in my constituency in Epsom. I met the volunteers who were preparing winter survival kits that will be sent to help Ukrainian families who face a winter with limited power supplies, at best. The work of such community groups, up and down the country, is inspirational. We stood with Ukraine from the beginning, and we stand with Ukraine now. I am afraid to say that 1,000 days on, Ukraine needs our support more than ever. The Liberal Democrats welcome the US’s decision on long-range missiles, and I hope the Foreign Secretary will be able to shed a little more light on the UK’s stance. However, we must go further. The clock is ticking: on 20 January, President Trump will be inaugurated for the second time. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that with the wavering US, it is incumbent on the UK to lead within Europe now? Will he commit to bolstering support for our Ukrainian allies, should it waver elsewhere? Will the Government begin the process of seizing Russian assets—the assets themselves, not just the interest—so that we can give Ukraine what is needed to liberate its territory and win the war? Let us lead the way and liberate Ukraine. Slava Ukraini!

• 18 Nov 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Today, I speak for my party in support of the legislation before us. It is clear that the armed forces community has been let down, not least under the previous Conservative Government. The findings of recent reports and surveys are testament to that. In 2023, the Haythornthwaite report found that the most common reason for leaving the armed forces was the impact on family and personal life. Overall satisfaction with service life was at just 45%. Only just over a third of personnel reported that they felt valued by the service. The Atherton report found that “the MoD and the Services are failing to protect female personnel and to help servicewomen achieve their full potential”. It is unacceptable that the experience of women in the armed forces, and the challenges that many female personnel face, such as sexual harassment and discrimination, have not been properly addressed. Armed forces families are also too frequently being let down. In the armed forces continuous attitude survey, one third of spouses said that they would be happier if their partner chose to leave the service. Service families are too frequently unable to get basic support, such as access to information, except through the member of the family who serves. The complaints system is not working. In her most recent annual report to Parliament, the Service Complaints Ombudsman, Mariette Hughes, was scathing about it; she remains “unable to say that the Service Complaints system is efficient, effective or fair”. That is the eighth consecutive year that she has reached that assessment. Women remain disproportionately represented in the complaints system. Those who serve in the armed forces, and their families, are putting their life on the line for our country. It is profoundly disappointing that report after report makes it clear that they have been, and continue to be, neglected, ignored and taken for granted. They deserve better. Delivering a fair deal for the armed forces community is not just the right thing to do; it is crucial for our national security. The conditions that service personnel and their families endure contribute directly to the crisis in recruitment and retention that our armed forces are experiencing. In an increasingly insecure world, with Putin’s troops waging their illegal war in Ukraine and Trump about to return to the White House, we cannot afford to not take this issue seriously. The Liberal Democrats very much welcome the Bill. We welcome the fact that the commissioner will be a much-needed point of contact for armed forces families; will be a public champion for families, having been tasked in law with raising awareness of the welfare issues faced by the armed forces community; and will be properly empowered to independently investigate complaints—for example, they can arrive on sites without notice. We are pleased that the legislation has been introduced to Parliament less than six months after the election. We will support the Bill, and we will work with Members on all sides of the House to strengthen it during its passage through this House. I thank the Service Complaints Ombudsman and her office for the work that they have done since 2015, offering independent insight into processes and highlighting the failings of the complaints system. It is right for the work of the office to be subsumed into this stronger role, but as the ombudsman made clear, further work needs to be done to bring the service complaints system up to standard. I would have liked this legislation to be used to set that in motion. We must ensure that the Bill delivers for armed forces families. Families are at the heart of the Bill, and will clearly be of significant importance to the work of the new commissioner, but clause 4 leaves the definition of “family member” up to the Secretary of State. We hope that during the passage of the Bill, the Government will commit to a definition in the Bill, so that there is certainty for armed forces families. It is important that we ensure that families made up of kinship carers—there are often aunts and uncles who care for nieces or nephews—are in scope of the definition. We must also think of divorced partners who are still affected. It is vital, too, that bereaved families come in scope of the definition, and accordingly the work of the commissioner. I hope that Members from across the House agree that bereaved families need the advocacy of the new commissioner as much as, if not more than, anyone else in the armed forces community. We also need to ensure that reservists and recruits have equal access to the commissioner. As for female, black and minority ethic, non-UK and LGBTQ+ personnel, the Government must ensure that the commissioner’s office is equipped with up-to-date evidence and community connections to identify issues and be able to reach into those communities. It is to that advocacy role that I now turn. Clause 1 makes clear that the role of the commissioner will be not just to promote the welfare of service personnel and their families, but to improve the public’s awareness of welfare issues experienced by armed forces families. I hope that the Minister will be able to shed some light on how the Government envisage the interaction of those two separate functions in practice. The crucial issue is resource—we need to ensure that both those ambitions can be met, as well as the existing responsibilities of the ombudsman role which is being subsumed into the commissioner’s remit—and I urge the Government to offer assurances on that front. I also hope that the Minister will be able to offer further clarification of the appointment process, as well as subsequent timescales for getting the commissioner’s office up and running. The Government have committed to pre-appointment scrutiny of the preferred candidate by the Defence Committee, but what happens if the Select Committee disagrees? Clearly, whoever is appointed to this role must be truly independent of Government. Under the previous Conservative Government we saw the limitations of the existing public appointments process, even when Select Committees were involved. Giving relevant Committees a confirmatory vote would greatly strengthen the safeguards in the appointments process, and would ensure that the best person for the job was put forward, rather than the best person for the Government. Can the Minister also clarify how the commissioner will interact with the existing Veterans Commissioners for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the proposed national veterans’ commissioner for England? The Armed Forces Commissioner must prioritise accessibility to the communities that he or she aims to represent and support. We must ensure that if access is digital only, that does not create a barrier if, for example, people are deployed or have a low reading age. It is vital that our armed forces know who they can turn to for support when they need it. Military personnel are trained to be resilient and endure tough conditions, and the culture does not make it easy for people to reach out; I have personal experience of that. If we are to introduce an Armed Forces Commissioner, the Government must include an effort for culture change as well, and I would welcome a greater understanding of how they will achieve that. I understand that people who have served in the armed forces may be considered for this position. Such people could bring valuable knowledge and insight, but how will the Government ensure that they are sufficiently removed from the current culture to bring an independent perspective? It is also vital that, while welcoming the creation of this new role, we acknowledge that it will in no way be a silver bullet to address the many problems facing the armed forces community, which I have mentioned and which have been touched on by other Members. To deal with serious complaints, for instance, we need to strengthen rules to help support whistleblowers across Government, and the Liberal Democrats continue to support the creation of an office of the whistleblower for that purpose. We urge the Government to go further and fully implement the Atherton report, to ensure that women in the armed forces, who have been let down far too frequently, receive the fundamental protections that they deserve. We should also look at strengthening the armed forces covenant. Will the commissioner’s role include giving due regard to the covenant, and will the Minister agree to strengthen the covenant by placing a legal duty on all Departments to give due regard to it? We will continue to present proposals to improve the quality of life for service personnel and their families. There are basic steps that we can and should take, such as establishing a one-stop shop for families of service personnel so they can easily gain access to information, including the publication of a guide and an accessible helpline. Housing is also hugely important: service personnel and their families should be able to live in a decent home. I pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan), who has campaigned for a decent homes standard for military housing, and I hope that when the Renters’ Rights Bill comes back to the House for its remaining stages, the Government will listen to Liberal Democrat representations on the need to enshrine that in law. The armed forces community deserves a fair deal. The Liberal Democrats support these measures as a step in the right direction, but we will continue to call on the Government to do more to ensure that service personnel and their families are no longer taken for granted.

• 18 Nov 2024 · Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  I have heard from a number of young people who have tried to join the military, only to be met with long waits for their medical assessment. I understand the need for applicants to be thoroughly assessed, but we are losing valuable recruits due to the processing time. Many cannot afford to wait around and ultimately choose a different path. How is the Minister ensuring that the medical assessment process runs efficiently?

• 18 Nov 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Tomorrow marks 1,000 days since the illegal invasion of Ukraine. With the incoming White House Administration casting doubts on continued US support for Ukraine, I echo the calls heard across the House today urging the Minister to confirm that the Government plan to authorise the use of Storm Shadow missiles in Russia.

• 13 Nov 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. During a hospital stay, my constituent, a new mother with an exclusively breastfed infant, encountered resistance from staff when trying to keep her child with her. The distress caused left her needing post-traumatic stress disorder therapy. What steps is the Minister taking with Government colleagues to ensure that hospitals support breastfeeding mothers appropriately?

• 11 Nov 2024 · Defence: 2.5% GDP Spending Commitment · Hansard source

  More

  We are deeply concerned about the impact of the US elections on Ukraine and Europe. President Trump is an unreliable partner and, within days of his election, US support to Ukraine is regrettably under question. Clearly the UK needs to urgently set out a path to spending 2.5% of GDP on defence. We need to lead in Europe. Does the Secretary of State agree that the previous Government’s legacy on our Army, which is the smallest since the Napoleonic era, is deeply regrettable? Will he commit to securing a UK-EU defence and security agreement, as was on the table while Theresa May was Prime Minister? Will the Government convene a summit on saving Ukraine, to begin the process of seizure of frozen Russian assets, so that the UK and our European allies can support Ukraine regardless of the path the US takes?

• 5 Nov 2024 · Income Tax (Charge) · Hansard source

  More

  It is important that we recognise how the previous Conservative Government left the NHS in a weakened state, with soaring GP waiting times, crumbling hospital buildings, and promises of new hospitals that they simply could not deliver. The Liberal Democrats welcome the £22.6 billion of funding for the NHS, and the £3.1 billion of capital funding for the NHS estate. However, far too many people are struggling to get a GP appointment when they need one, which can lead to misdiagnosis or delays, with people often having to go to A&E instead. It is great that the Budget includes dedicated funding to improve GP practices, but more focus is needed on the recruitment and training of GPs, and on ensuring that we retain experienced GPs. It is therefore disappointing that GP surgeries are not exempt from the rise in employer’s national insurance, as that will ultimately reduce the number of staff they can employ, which will affect everyone. We need to prioritise general practice so that more people can be treated in the community, as that is better for individual health and will cost the NHS less. We believe that everyone should have the right to see a GP within seven days. I was also disappointed that there was no specific mention of dentistry in the Budget. Tooth decay is one of the most common reasons for hospital admissions in children aged between six and 10, and more than 100,000 children have been admitted to hospital with rotting teeth since 2018. More funding is needed to guarantee access to an NHS dentist for everyone needing urgent and emergency care. On the new hospital programme, hopefully one of the new hospitals will at some point be built in our constituency, but I was disappointed not to hear more about that. It is good that hospitals with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete will be addressed urgently, but we desperately need more details on that now. Buildings such as St Helier hospital are simply deteriorating, with issues such as sinking foundations, leaking roofs, and outdated infrastructure. Epsom hospital can no longer cope with current demand, and we urgently need a new specialist emergency care hospital. My constituents simply cannot wait any longer for their promised new hospital, and the country should not be forced to fund inefficient health provision. I look forward to hearing from the Secretary of State in the new year with more information about that. Many constituents who are just above the threshold for pension credit have contacted me about how the lack of the winter fuel payment will affect them. It will particularly affect those in ill health, because they need to turn on the heating earlier and for longer. While pensioners have been asked to apply for pension credit, Dorah-May from Age Concern in my constituency has contacted me. She said that applying for pension credit is a minefield, and that is why people from Age Concern go around all the time to help and support elderly people with that. Charities and small businesses will also be negatively affected by the Budget, and that is disappointing. I will wrap up by urging the Government to look at raising money by reversing the Conservative tax cuts for big banks and by asking social media giants to pay their fair share.

• 29 Oct 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. Many households are facing homelessness due to increasing household costs. What support can the Chancellor provide to them?

• 28 Oct 2024 · Remembrance and Veterans · Hansard source

  More

  Today, we gather to honour the sacrifices and contributions of our veterans—brave men and women who have selflessly put their lives on the line for our country. Each one of them embodies the courage, resilience and dedication that define the spirit of service. We should not just recognise their service on the battlefield, but understand the challenges they continue to face once they return home. I start with a bit of my own story. I served in the British Army as part of the Royal Military Police. I did not come from a military family. My journey began with a desire to lead, travel and make a difference. I studied languages at university, and was drawn to the British Army’s role in international aid and disaster relief. I thought it would eventually lead me into humanitarian work. Training at Sandhurst was gruelling, especially with equipment that was not designed for women, but I came out of that experience with friendships that have lasted a lifetime with people who saw me through my highest and lowest points. After Sandhurst, I was deployed to Bosnia, where my platoon was already stationed as part of the stabilisation force—SFOR—a NATO peacekeeping force. Working alongside American, British, Canadian, Czech and Dutch troops, I witnessed at first hand the disparities in resources and funding. The contrast was stark. Our American counterparts had advanced equipment, with all the bells and whistles, while we operated with much less. That showed me not only the resilience of our troops, but the challenges we face due to limited resources. Shortly after that, I was sent to Iraq on Operation Telic IV with the 1st Battalion Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment, tasked with retraining the Iraqi police force and supporting policing efforts to train over 1,200 of the Iraqi police service in Maysan province, a volatile and dangerous area. We trained the police outside our camp and in old air bases, with unexploded ordnance next to us, and visit police stations supporting the IPS with their work. We distributed cars, equipment, weapons and money to the IPS, and gathered intelligence on Iranian weapon smuggling. Just a year before my arrival, six of my RMP colleagues were killed in Majar al-Kabir. I vividly remember the fear of my first night, aged just 26, travelling in a blacked-out bus after landing in Maysan, en route to Camp Abu Naji, really unsure of what lay ahead—a fear I imagine many soldiers face today: the fear of the unknown, the fear of what is to come, especially those on the frontline in places such as Ukraine. Iraq was not easy. We came under fire regularly, and some of my fellow soldiers did not make it home. Tensions escalated when photos were published falsely showing British soldiers abusing Iraqi detainees. For several days, our base was surrounded by angry armed locals. There was a lot of tension but we got through it together. On the base, there were over 1,000 soldiers, but only three female officers and a handful of female non-commissioned officers. The one positive thing about that was that at least I could get to the toilet and the shower without a queue. Despite the challenges, I was grateful for the brave interpreters, local police and all the other locals who worked with us on camp and out on the ground. We must remember the sacrifices local people on operations make to support our armed forces abroad. After returning to the UK, we started a family, and I had to make a choice between family and career. With no military support to help balance these responsibilities, I eventually left the Army earlier than I had planned. That is too common a story. As the Haythornthwaite review highlighted, the most common reason service members leave the armed forces is the impact on family and personal life. There were no options for me as a mother. I would have been sent to Afghanistan next, and there were no nurseries on the frontline. There was no flexible career path for me, and I am not alone. Many service members face pressures that extend beyond the battlefield, and we simply need to do more to support them. I am immensely proud of my constituency’s connection to the armed forces. We have Langley Vale, where more than 8,000 soldiers trained during the first world war. It was where Lord Kitchener famously inspected the troops, and it now serves as a place of reflection, with beautiful sculptures honouring our military past. Our local Royal Engineers, the 135 Geographic Squadron, recently celebrated their 75th anniversary this year, proudly marching with bayonets fixed, exercising their freedom of Epsom and Ewell. These are powerful reminders of the sacrifices made by generations of service members. Honouring our veterans goes beyond remembrance: it is about action. There are pressing issues that we must address to ensure that veterans and their families are supported after their service. Housing is one such issue. It is unacceptable that more than 2,000 households with a veteran were assessed as homeless last year. High-quality, affordable accommodation for veterans should be accessible across the country. No one who served our nation should face homelessness. The winter fuel allowance is another concern. Many veterans struggle financially, and recent cuts to the allowance will hit some of them hard. It is a lifeline, especially in colder months, and veterans should be able to rely on this support. Military compensation also needs reform. The current system often counts military compensation towards means-tested benefits. In 2022, about 150,000 veterans received compensation for injuries sustained during service, but many councils count it as income, penalising veterans who desperately need support. That practice goes against the armed forces covenant, and it is time that we changed those rules.