UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT of ORAL EVIDENCE to Be Published As HC 51-I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 51-i HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE NORTHERN IRELAND AFFAIRS COMMITTEE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ARMED FORCES COVENANT IN NORTHERN IRELAND WEDNESDAY 15 MAY 2013 MAJOR ALAN MCDADE, LT COL (RETD) HOWARD BROOKER AND CAPT (RETD) RAYMOND CORBETT BRIGADIER ROB THOMSON Evidence heard in Public Questions 298-368 USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others. 2. Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings. 3. Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant. 4. Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee. 1 Oral Evidence Taken before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on Wednesday 15 May 2013 Members present: Mr Laurence Robertson (Chair) Mr David Anderson Mr Stephen Hepburn Lady Hermon Naomi Long Dr Alasdair McDonnell Nigel Mills Andrew Percy David Simpson ________________ Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Major Alan McDade, Chairman, Lt Col (Retd) Howard Brooker, Vice President, and Capt (Retd) Raymond Corbett, Secretary, Regimental Association of the Royal Irish Regiment, gave evidence. Q298 Chair: Gentlemen, thank you very much for joining us. As you are aware, we are conducting an inquiry into the Armed Forces Covenant and its particular application in Northern Ireland. We are very grateful to you for coming to talk to us this afternoon. We would like to ask various questions. Can I invite you to make any very brief opening remarks you wish, particularly telling us where you draw your members from? Alan McDade: Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. It is kind of the Committee to invite us to be here and we are very thankful for the opportunity to address you. Our written submission has been with you for some time and we stand by what we say in that written submission. As to our membership, currently the Regimental Association of the Royal Irish Regiment is a bit unique, as associations go, insofar as we draw our membership from those ex-servicemen who serve in the First and Second Battalions and the now disbanded Home Service Royal Irish Regiment. Equally, if any members or ex-servicemen from the Ulster Defence Regiment, the Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, the Royal Ulster Rifles, the Royal Irish Fusiliers and the Royal Irish Rangers find themselves closer to our locations, they can join our branch and become full members of our regimental association. We currently have around 480 active members, drawn from a population who are young, active and want to play a part in the association. We have a lot of sleepers who are on the books but do not actively turn up at meetings. The association’s aims are to be there as an organisation to promote comradeship, to carry on from the service community, be a welfare organisation and help any servicemen or women who find themselves in need of support, whatever that support may be. We put the ethos around our membership that every one of us is a welfare worker and that we keep an eye out for each other. If we find that any of our members, or ex-servicemen who are not members, are from any other regiment we try to assist them and point them in the right direction to find assistance from charities or their own regimental associations. 2 Q299 David Simpson: You are very welcome, gentlemen, to the Committee. The evidence or submission that you gave in writing is very interesting. If you are diligent in your work you may have read some of the evidence that we received. It is very confusing for the Committee, certainly from my perspective, because the last time we had evidence was from the Royal British Legion and from SSAFA, who made it very clear in the Committee that they were not in favour of the Covenant being implemented in Northern Ireland because they felt it would have a detrimental effect. Personally, I disagree. You are saying that it should be. Why do you believe it should be, and how could it be implemented? Alan McDade: As we have stated, the Military Covenant has been enshrined into UK law, we believe. Servicemen in Northern Ireland are therefore disadvantaged, purely and simply because, if it is UK law— Q300 David Simpson: Can I stop you for one second? Sorry for cutting across you. Chairman, can I clarify that point? I think SSAFA mentioned at the last evidence session that they did not believe it was enshrined in law. I stand to be corrected on that. Chair: My understanding, having had it researched, is that the Armed Forces Covenant is mentioned in law, it is written in law, but there is not a legal requirement to implement it. Special Adviser, have I put that correctly? Special Adviser: Yes. Naomi Long: Could we also clarify that neither SSAFA nor the British Legion said that they did not want it implemented, but they raised issues about how it would be implemented. David Simpson: I think if we check the minutes, Chairman— Chair: One thing at once, please. With regard to the legal position, have I stated that correctly? Special Adviser: The principles are enshrined in law and the Secretary of State for Defence is required to provide an annual report on the Covenant, but I think that is distinct from saying it is enshrined in law, which implies that every provision of it is written in law and is judiciable. That, I think, is not the case. That is what Liam Fox, as the Secretary of State for Defence at the time, made clear in the Commons in 2011. Q301 David Simpson: To go back to what I said—taking Naomi’s point—I stand to be corrected if I repeated it wrongly, but they did say that if it was forced through, it could have a detrimental effect on the current provision that is there. They said words to that effect, but the minutes can be checked in relation to that. Chair: You can state your position on it anyway. Alan McDade: If it is not there, is it not the case that servicemen are disadvantaged in Northern Ireland compared to England, Scotland and Wales? The reverse has to be the same, by definition. Q302 David Simpson: How do you think it could be implemented? Alan McDade: For ex-servicemen who have been demobbed in Portsmouth, whatever they are entitled to, housing etc, should be the same in Cardiff, it should be the same in Edinburgh and it should be the same in Belfast. That is the position we are taking. Q303 Lady Hermon: It is very nice indeed to see all three of you here. Sorry we ran a little bit over with our private business but it is very good of you indeed to come over and give us evidence. Could we focus a little bit more on where you think Northern Ireland ex-service personnel are disadvantaged compared to those in the rest of the United Kingdom? 3 Where do you actually identify those specific deficiencies? Mr Brooker, we have not heard your voice, so go on: the floor is yours, as they say. Howard Brooker: Could I say firstly that the military community in Northern Ireland are different from the military community everywhere else? That is the first point you need to take on board. Q304 Lady Hermon: Why would you describe yourselves as being different? That is not to say that I disagree with you, but I would like you to articulate it. Howard Brooker: I am sure you very much agree with me, but that is the first thing I need to say. I served as a part-time soldier for over 30 years. I lived, worked and served as a soldier in the same community. I worked as a farmer at my home, I lived, obviously, in my home and I served as a soldier around my home. That automatically makes me different. With that came a great threat to my life. I am not saying “I” personally, but I am speaking broadly about soldiers across Northern Ireland. With that came a threat to my life. The differences are ad infinitum. I could list them now: personal security, where I could go, where I could not go, how I treated my family—the list is endless. I am different; therefore, when I serve or leave the regiment, I have different needs. I will give you a couple of examples that I have not heard addressed. Lady Hermon: That would be very helpful, thank you. Howard Brooker: One of them is the issue of the personal security of the ex-member of the Royal Irish Regiment or that family. I left the regiment when the Home Service battalions were disbanded on 31 March 2007. Incidentally, I left the Home Service part of the regiment as the highest ranked soldier. I personally was the highest ranked soldier on that day and the only person in that rank, so I was unique. I had personal security needs when I left on that day and since, and those are not addressed.