Paul Foster MP: speeches

77 published records · newest first.

Speeches

27 Apr 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over) · Hansard source
More
Will the Secretary of State be absolutely clear that if the Bill is not passed, veterans will have no protection whatsoever moving forward?
27 Apr 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over) · Hansard source
More
rose—
21 Apr 2026 · West Bank: Illegal Settlements · Hansard source
More
After the destruction of Gaza and the deaths of in excess of 72,000 Palestinians, it is evident that the Israeli Government have turned their attention not only to Lebanon and Iran, but also to the west bank. In the west bank there are now daily reports of extreme violence and death, as well as the forceful eviction of Palestinians and the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements. That is not only immoral, but yet further evidence of illegal Israeli Government-sponsored activity. Does the Secretary of State agree that the violence in the west bank must stop immediately, as must the continued expansion of illegal settlements? Can she assure the House that despite the continuing conflicts in Ukraine, Lebanon, Iran and Sudan, the Government are very much still focused on Gaza and the west bank?
21 Apr 2026 · West Bank: Illegal Settlements · Hansard source
More
21. What diplomatic steps her Department is taking to oppose the expansion of illegal settlements in the west bank.
16 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source
More
Would the right hon. Gentleman update me on where he heard that the Government have any intention whatsoever of withdrawing the HM forces or HM veterans railcards? I have a veterans railcard, and I have not seen any evidence anywhere that there is an intention to withdraw them.
16 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source
More
If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to our armed forces as a global laughing stock, is that perhaps because of—we had this debate in the Chamber yesterday—the inheritance his party’s Government left: no ships, no aircraft and the lowest number of British troops since the Napoleonic wars? Does he concede that one of the problems with delivering the DIP is that appalling inheritance?
16 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I can provide a real-world example of how ludicrous the current system is. A friend of mine joined the Paras, completed P company, served with the Paras, smelt the coffee, and joined the REME and transferred to the Royal Engineers. He served for about 12 years in colour service and left. Within a year of leaving, he wanted to join his local reserve infantry unit, which said that it would accept him only if he did full reserve basic training. I take it that this legislation will prevent that nonsense in the future, because it seems ludicrous.
15 Apr 2026 · Strategic Defence Review: Funding · Hansard source
More
Does the Minister agree that we must understand that we inherited an MOD procurement system in disarray, unfunded defence programmes, an Air Force without enough aircraft or helicopters, a Navy without enough ships, and an Army with a low—Napoleonic—number of troops? We face wars in the middle east and Ukraine. We are working with an exceptionally challenging situation, and we must get this right. Please do not allow the Opposition to rewrite history.
14 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I find this a fascinating debate because we can all see the meaning of the amendment, but the hon. Gentleman mentioned victims. If he recalls, we all visited the Defence Serious Crime Command and the victim support unit, and it was made clear that the victim support service has made some real improvements over the past few years. In any crime investigation that is transferred from the service justice system to the criminal justice system, the victim support unit cannot support the victim. That is a concern to me, and it was raised with us. Does the hon. Member agree that is a considerable concern that we should look at?
14 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
More
Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the majority of courts martial involve non-commissioned individuals? Although senior commissioned officers are subject to court martial at times, they are in the minority. The majority are non-commissioned officers.
26 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source
More
The independent defence housing strategy team looked at the issue of a defence housing association, and said that “transfer outside the public sector to a housing association or other private sector structure is not appropriate. It would be most likely to set back the renewal of the estate, increase costs of delivery and hamper operational effectiveness of the Armed Forces.” Was the right hon. Member aware of that?
26 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source
More
Will the right hon. Member give way?
25 Mar 2026 · Good Friday Agreement · Hansard source
More
3. What steps he is taking to mark the anniversary of the Good Friday agreement.
25 Mar 2026 · Good Friday Agreement · Hansard source
More
We approach the anniversary of the Good Friday agreement, which was historic in that it ultimately delivered peace for a generation. With the knowledge that it requires constant political co-operation and public support, its biggest challenge no doubt is the Tory-Reform policy of leaving the European convention on human rights. If the UK left the ECHR, that would undermine a core principle of the agreement. Does the Secretary of State agree that there are some within this Chamber who would wholly compromise the peace in Northern Ireland for short-lived, ill-judged political gain?
24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
More
Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that we may be jumping the gun slightly? The covenant’s statutory guidance will explain in detail what due regard means in practice.
24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
More
On this Committee, we have veterans and former council leaders, and I am both. One of the main reasons for all the changes being made in the Bill is a recognition that, historically, the covenant has not been delivered appropriately by local authorities. However, does the Minister agree that there is evidence that it has significantly improved recently, and that including Op Valour will take that improvement a step further?
24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
More
Is it not the case that a civilian family who lived in Wiltshire and moved to Yorkshire would face exactly the same challenges as the service family? The covenant is about service personnel and families not being at a disadvantage compared with their civilian counterparts. Actually, they are already not at a disadvantage because both are dealt with in exactly the same way.
24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
More
Does my hon. Friend share my concern that, with this amendment, we run the risk of creating a minimal requirement that organisations may seek to meet, without going any further, thus undermining the delivery and service of the covenant for our veterans?
4 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson · Hansard source
More
My understanding is that new information is coming out daily and that other current Members of this House may or may not be directly linked to the Epstein-Mandelson scandal. Does my hon. Friend agree that they should be fully investigated as well?
4 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson · Hansard source
More
Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
7 Jan 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source
More
9. What steps he has taken to engage with relevant stakeholders on the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill.
7 Jan 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source
More
Under the previous Government’s unlawful Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, the Police Service of Northern Ireland was required to shut down more than 1,000 investigations, including 225 investigations into the deaths of soldiers and veterans. Will the Secretary of State please assure the families of murdered British armed forces personnel that, should they wish to approach the reformed commission, it will consider their case and may be able to provide them with the answers that many of them have long sought?
17 Dec 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles: Legacy and Reconciliation · Hansard source
More
Last month, the House debated the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, and we heard many moving contributions about the devastating loss experienced by families, including military families, many of whom are still seeking answers. Does the Secretary of State agree that the voices of those the Government’s legislation is for should be at the forefront of our minds when we debate it and every time we debate it?
18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source
More
I have plenty of views on that, but it does not change my view on immunity. I believe immunity is wrong, particularly for soldiers. Moving on, I understand the concerns of my fellow veterans that any investigations into historical deaths have previously disproportionately focused on the actions of the armed forces and former police officers, rather than the paramilitaries. The Government have recognised that and introduced a number of key protections for anyone asked to provide information. Those include protection from repeated investigations, a right to stay at home, a right to anonymity, protection from cold calling, protection in old age and the right to be heard.
18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source
More
The peace process in Northern Ireland was hard-won, and tough compromises had to be accepted by all parties. The Good Friday agreement was never going to have the wholesale support of all, but it brought about an end to the horrendous violence. However, it did not include a mechanism for dealing with unresolved killings during the troubles—either by terrorists or by the security forces—and nor did it provide an amnesty for crimes that had not yet been prosecuted. Let us also not forget that, according to data from the House of Commons Library, around 3,520 people lost their lives during the troubles. They included 1,441 British service personnel, 722 of whom died at the hands of paramilitaries. Three hundred RUC officers were killed, and 301 individual deaths were the responsibility of the British military. Of those, 121 were republican terrorists, 101 were loyalist terrorists, and the remainder were all civilians. We therefore have a duty to ensure that all legacy issues arising from the troubles are dealt with compassionately, diligently and legally. The previous Government’s legacy Act has been found to be unlawful by both the High Court in Belfast and the Court of Appeal. The High Court found several provisions of that Act to be incompatible with the European convention on human rights, and it was therefore deemed unlawful. It also found that it was incompatible with article 2 of the Windsor framework and should therefore be disapplied. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, and also found additional aspects of the legacy Act to be incompatible with the ECHR. There are many separate elements of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, but I will keep my contribution to two specific areas: immunity from prosecution for historical crimes, and the concerns of my fellow veterans moving forward under the new legislation. As a veteran, I have never sought or agreed that, as a British serviceman, I should ever be permitted immunity from prosecution for my actions during service. We work within the law of armed conflict, the Geneva convention and the laws of the United Kingdom when serving here, to name but three. We are trained to undertake operations within strict legal protocols, whatever the provocation we are experiencing or the hostile environment we are in. There has been much opposition to the immunity offered within the legacy Act. The three veterans commissioners in July said: “This is not a call for immunity from the law, but for fairness under it”. Ben Wallace, the former Defence Secretary, said that the British Army is “not above the law.” Brigadier John Donnelly, who served in Northern Ireland and is now chair of the Centre for Military Justice, said only last week: “You cannot have a system of law that applies to some groups and not to others. It is vital that soldiers operating in support of the civil powers are held fully accountable to the laws they are required to enforce. That is the difference between the soldier and the terrorist.” We must also understand that it is not just British service personnel who were granted immunity from prosecution under the previous legislation; it was also terrorists who murdered civilians and British servicemen and servicewomen. More than 200 investigations into deaths of Operation Banner soldiers were shut down upon the enactment of the legacy Act, against the wishes of those soldiers’ families. Immunity from prosecution is dangerous, because it invalidates the justice system, sacrifices victims’ rights, weakens deterrence, violates international law and undermines long-term peace and trust in our institutions. I will never agree that immunity is the appropriate solution. It sets an awful precedent. If it were to be implemented by foreign Governments currently in military conflicts, we would be rightly appalled.

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →