‘Over Christmas, most disturbingly seven former senior SAS officers felt the need to write in The Telegraph:
“In this Troubles Bill, the Government is complicit in this war on our Armed Forces.”
‘A few days later, the Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner, appointed by this Government, said that the Bill treats veterans “worse than terrorists” and is
“eating at the very fabric of the Armed Forces”.
‘ In November, nine former four-star generals argued that this “morally incoherent” Bill poses a “direct threat to national security”.
‘Those generals tell us that highly trained members of special forces are already leaving the service, and by definition these men are very, very difficult to replace. No wonder The Times has said that
“a fundamental lack of political and military understanding lies at the heart of this Bill.”
The Rt Hon Alex Burghart, Shadow Minister for Northern Ireland, cutting straight to the heart of the issue in the latest Northern Ireland Troubles Bill debate on the 7th of January 2026 which constituents can access here:
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill - Hansard - UK Parliament
Like so many MPs around the country, I have been contacted by and held surgeries with many constituents, veterans who, understandably, feel very alarmed by the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill being pursued by this Labour Government. They are rightly concerned and dismayed by the impact it will have, they believe, not only on those who have served their country faithfully in the past, but also on those serving now and into the future. I have fed all these concerns into our Shadow Front Bench team and I can assure you, those concerns were heard, recognised and acted on. I have often been in the chamber to witness these discussions and concerns, supporting my front bench colleagues.
In the earlier Northern Ireland Troubles Bill debate held on the 18th of November last year, my Shadow Cabinet colleague Alex Burghart MP, the Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, opened rightly by,
‘paying tribute to those brave souls who served in Operation Banner—the longest and, surely, one of the most difficult operations that our military forces ever undertook. I know that some of them are in the Gallery today, and some of them are sitting behind me. I would like to thank them with my whole heart for the service they gave and extend that same thanks to the brave men and women of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. The generations who have come after cannot fully understand what they went through, what they saw and what they did for peace.’
He then explained,
‘the last Government chose to draw a line under the litigation of the troubles, and today that line is being erased. Our legacy Act was a response to the emerging legal reality—no less true than it was three years ago—that the legal system was ceasing to provide meaningful answers to victims, while dragging veterans through the courts in clearly vexatious cases. The process itself had become a means of punishment, and time is reducing the chances of convictions.’
And laid out the Official Opposition, Conservative amendment to the Bill to be debated:
“this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill because, by removing the conditional immunity scheme introduced by the last Government in the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023, and reintroducing inquests and restoring civil claims for Troubles-related incidents halted by that Act, the Bill will lead to veterans once again being dragged before the courts facing potential prosecution for incidents that happened decades ago, while former paramilitaries are largely untouched; because the Government’s published list of so-called protections for veterans remains unclear and not fulfilled by this Bill; because the Government has not confirmed which of these protections will also apply to former paramilitaries; because the Bill does not prevent former paramilitaries holding key roles associated with the Legacy Commission; and because the Bill risks undermining the morale of, as well as both recruitment to and retention within, the armed forces at a time of significantly heightened international tensions and threats to the national security of the UK.”
At a time when the huge threats and geopolitical instability we face as a nation are the most serious for generations, I believe it is a huge, wasteful folly in the extreme for this Labour Government to choose to repeal the Northern Ireland legacy legislation which the previous Conservative Government passed. The previous Government’s Legacy Act meant our Northern Ireland veterans could finally sleep at night, knowing they would not be hauled up and prosecuted for serving their country, decades ago.
My neighbour, Rt Hon Tom Tugendhat MP (Con), spoke as usual, roundly and eloquently:
‘I have fought on the frontline and know what the heat, dust, confusion and fear can be like. There is a difference between that and having to explain oneself in a courtroom 20 years later, when all we have is gossip and rumour—because nobody else was there, nobody else was telling the truth, nobody else witnessed the reality of the difficult decisions that were taken. All we are doing in holding lance corporals, corporals and commanders all the way through the process is abdicating our responsibility for choosing to send them.’
The Labour Government’s decision to repeal the Legacy Act removes that certainty and opens the floodgates to a new wave of vexatious legal action against our veterans - threatening the Army’s morale just as we face the most profound military threats since the Cold War. I am far from alone in fearing that prosecuting those who served their country also undermines military recruitment and retention at the worst possible time. As Alex Burghart pointed out,
‘We find ourselves in a situation where retired generals, SAS veterans and the like are all telling this House not to proceed. They are telling us that there will be consequences—for recruitment, for retention and for national security. This morning in a statement, Soldier Z said that
“the damage being done to the morale and fibre of UK special forces and armed forces…must be understood by the public, because it’s very well understood by the SAS.”
When such people speak, this House has an obligation to listen.’
Like many, I believe revoking measures in the Act relating to immunity from Troubles-related prosecutions and civil actions will set back progress towards providing better outcomes to those most affected by the Troubles, while doing nothing to resolve the Troubles' complex legacy; I do understand those who have concerns it may even prevent Northern Ireland from looking to the future.
I am proud my Party, the Conservative Party, will always stand up for our veterans. For example, back in February, when the Northern Ireland Coroner came to a verdict of ‘unlawful killing’ against British soldiers involved in the 1992 Clonoe ambush, my colleague the Shadow Defence Secretary – Rt Hon James Cartlidge MP - wrote to the Ministry of Defence (MOD) and I am pleased he has been successful in urging them to take action by judicially reviewing the NI Coroner’s Clonoe verdict.
For those who may not be aware of this case, on 16 February 1992, known IRA terrorists armed with a heavy machine gun and AKM rifles fired 30 rounds at Coalisland RUC station before driving to Clonoe, where they were engaged by British soldiers, who shot dead four of them. Given that the terrorists were clearly on a mission to murder that night, my colleagues and I understand why so many people have reacted with huge anger to the coroner’s court findings that the use of lethal force was “unjustified”. It appears to me the Coroner’s verdict strayed into speculative judgements around motivation in relation to the soldiers concerned; far beyond where a Coroner would usually venture, and with profound consequences.
Our front bencher, the Shadow Minister Burghart, the Shadow Secretary of State importantly referenced this in the debate, saying:
‘It is very clear that the case that was heard in Belfast last month was a vexatious complaint. The judge said it was “ludicrous” and that it should never have come anywhere near the court, but for four years a member of the special forces was pursued, and all his comrades and colleagues thought that if such a thing could happen, they might have the same legal action brought against them in future.’
Please rest assured that I will continue to closely follow any further developments in this review on behalf of my constituents and stand up for our forces.
There is considerable and understandable concern and alarm that the Labour Government’s insistence on restore coronial inquests in Legacy cases will lead to yet more of our veterans being dragged before the courts, exposing them to a new era of legal persecution and vexatious ‘lawfare’. These soldiers were obeying their chain of command, decades ago, to keep us safe.
I was pleased even the Lib Dem spokesperson agreed,
‘the Bill does not provide sufficient safeguards for veterans, nor does it provide sufficient safeguards against lawfare, historical narrative revision or disparities between how ex-security personnel and others will be treated.
That is why my party…will support the Conservative reasoned amendment, to deny Second Reading of the Bill until the fundamental issue of sufficient protection for veterans is addressed.’
You can rest assured that my colleagues and I will continue do everything we can, as the official Opposition, to push back against the Government’s plans in the House of Commons. I have provided the link to that full debate transcript here:
Northern Ireland Troubles Bill - Hansard - UK Parliament
I am sure you will be interested to read the many excellent contributions to this debate made by my colleagues, including Tom Tugendhat, David Davis, John Lamont, Lincoln Jopp and Sir Iain Duncan-Smith who spoke both knowledgably and passionately on behalf of our veterans - many are ex-services themselves, and so it’s personal.
Sadly, and despite the fact that, as Lincoln Jopp MP, pointed out,
‘there is no one in the Cabinet with any experience in government….there is no one in the Cabinet with any experience in the military’
Labour MPs are in the process of blindly voting their Troubles Bill through Parliament while refusing to listen to those with experience who are strongly counselling against doing so. However, if Labour do continue to repeal the Legacy Act, I can assure constituents a future Conservative Government would legislate to restore full legal protection for our veterans.
The Shadow Minister for Defence, Mark Francois MP, speaking for the Opposition, ended by saying,
‘In conclusion, no other country on earth would treat its own brave veterans in this way—none. This is a truly wretched Bill, supported by Sinn Féin but opposed not just by Members on the Opposition Benches but by thousands of veterans and their highly experienced former commanders, who really do know better. I say to all those veterans tonight that, if we get the chance, we will do whatever it takes to rescind Labour’s Bill and stand by them, just as we sought to do with our original legacy Act of 2023.
When all is said and done, it is a straightforward choice this evening, and a matter not of microdetail but of principle. It is the No Lobby to stand with our veterans, and with Private Tommy Atkins, without whose brave service there would never have been any Good Friday peace agreement in the first place. Or it is the Aye Lobby, for two-tier justice and lawfare for years, largely at taxpayers’ expense, and against our own troops who had the courage to deploy to Northern Ireland and oppose the terrorists in the first place. To put it another way, when the Division bells ring in a few minutes, and for the avoidance of doubt, we stand four-square with our veterans. Who now will stand with us?’
I resolutely stand with our veterans and I voted No.
The Greens, Independents and Labour Parties chose not to stand with us and voted against our amendment. And that, frankly, is the most important thing to know. Shameful.
