← Back to House of Commons Debates
Northern Ireland Troubles Legacy and Reconciliation 2026-01-21
21 January 2026
Lead MP
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Hilary Benn
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
DefenceNorthern Ireland
Other Contributors: 51
At a Glance
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Hilary Benn raised concerns about northern ireland troubles legacy and reconciliation 2026-01-21 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
DefenceNorthern Ireland
Government Statement
Today, I am moving the draft Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 (Remedial) Order 2025. The legacy of the troubles continues to affect Northern Ireland, with over 3,500 lives lost during that period, including almost 2,000 civilians and over 1,000 serving the state. Ninety per cent were killed by paramilitaries. Despite efforts like the Good Friday agreement in 1998 and subsequent legislation, questions remain for families of victims about why their loved ones died and at whose hands. The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 was found to be incompatible with human rights obligations and lacked support among victims and survivors or political parties. This remedial order will remove key effects of the provisions that were deemed incompatible, such as immunity for terrorists who murdered soldiers and civilians, which undermines trust in the rule of law. The order also removes a bar on troubles-related civil cases, leaving about 800 untouched but enabling around 120 new claims against the MOD to proceed. Doing so provides clarity ahead of wider reforms.
Fleur Anderson
Lab
Putney
Question
Does Hilary Benn agree that he is doing the right thing for victims with this remedial order, including ordinary people and veterans who were injured or lost loved ones?
Minister reply
Yes, any Government would need to deal with the legacy Act's flaws. The legislation needed addressing due to incompatibility issues.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
Question
Does Hilary Benn agree that the legacy Act was predicated on EU membership and that the current Government disagrees with immunity as a principle?
Minister reply
The legacy Act was found incompatible, but it never provided real protection due to legal challenges. The Human Rights Act is cited in this context.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Question
How does Hilary Benn feel about a live legal case by the Northern Ireland Veterans Movement against the order, given that it should not be moved while the case is proceeding?
Minister reply
While aware of the legal case, the Government believes there is a legal necessity to act now.
David Crabbe
Ulster Defence Regiment veteran
Question
Does Hilary Benn agree that immunity undermines the rule of law and creates a false equivalence between veterans and terrorists?
Minister reply
The 2023 Act created a false equivalence, which is why this remedial order aims to remove those provisions.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Question
Does Hilary Benn agree that the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998 established legal equivalence and not moral equivalence?
Minister reply
The Good Friday agreement, supported by over 70% of people in Northern Ireland, included provisions like those in the 1998 legislation for peace.
David Smith
Lab
North Northumberland
Question
What does Hilary Benn expect regarding civil cases against those who served in military or security services?
Minister reply
About 230 new civil claims were stopped by the Act, and around 120 cases against the MOD will be enabled to proceed if the remedial order passes.
Gavin Robinson
DUP
Belfast East
Question
Does Hilary Benn accept that there are questions about the appropriate nature of this remedial order given disagreements between higher and lower courts?
Minister reply
It is not unusual for higher courts to differ from lower ones, and the Government believes citizens should be able to bring civil cases.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that the letter of comfort issued to John Downey let him off on a particular occasion?
Minister reply
The letter Mr Downey received was issued wrongly, as it did not give him immunity from prosecution. The judge ruled the trial an abuse of process due to the state's promise, and Downey is currently awaiting trial for other charges.
David Davis
Con
Goole and Pocklington
Question
Does the letter of comfort grant immunity?
Minister reply
The letters did not provide amnesty or pardon convictions, as the early release scheme part of the Good Friday agreement indicates. The fact that Downey is awaiting prosecution proves he does not have immunity from prosecution.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
Question
Can the Secretary of State give immunity to veterans?
Minister reply
The Government does not agree with immunity as a matter of principle. Veterans uphold the law, and we need fairness under the rule of law rather than immunity.
Jim Allister
TUV
North Antrim
Question
How can an appeal concerning article 2 of the Windsor framework not affect section 10?
Minister reply
The declaration of incompatibility under the ECHR remains, as the court ruled both aspects. The interpretation of article 2 is subject to a continuing appeal but does not alter the fundamental legal reality regarding immunity.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
Is there any guarantee that the Republic of Ireland will withdraw their inter-state case if this legislation passes?
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
Question
Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that the Joint Committee on Human Rights’s opinion was not unanimous?
Minister reply
While I respect all opinions expressed, it is important to note that legislation often progresses based on majority votes. The Joint Committee's second report clearly recommended proceeding with a remedial order, and we are urged by them to approve this measure.
David Davis
Con
Haltemprice and Howden
Question
Does the Secretary of State acknowledge that there was significant support for our legislation in Northern Ireland according to polls?
Minister reply
The matter of public opinion is complex, but it is critical to act on legal imperatives. The Government’s decision reflects a need to align with human rights law while ensuring justice and peace.
David Davis
Con
Haltemprice and Howden
Question
My hon. Friend makes a very good point about that specific case. The judge criticised the allocation of legal aid for such futile cases, is it not a problem?
Minister reply
I agree with my right hon. Friend. In some quarters, there is an industry that allows victims to believe their chances of success are far greater than they actually are in practice.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
Question
Is this a proxy war where servicemen and women are used as pawns to relitigate the past? Veterans being harmed by an adversarial system that continues the troubles in another form.
Minister reply
I agree with my hon. Friend, who has great experience of these matters. The truth is that for some people this is the continuation of the troubles by other means. It is time to draw a line.
Richard Tice
Reform
Boston and Skegness
Question
Are we here because of our membership of a foreign court? Without ECHR, would we not be having this debate?
Minister reply
That is exactly one of the reasons why the next Conservative Government will leave the European convention on human rights.
Desmond Swayne
Con
East Dorset
Question
The Human Rights Act 1998 does not require action; it is a matter for this House. What are the options available to Government?
Minister reply
I believe that we almost got a scintilla of insight into how my right hon. Friend feels about the latest Joint Committee on Human Rights report.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
Question
The Secretary of State is using urgency to build trust in both civilian and military victims but seems to miss out a group: military veterans.
Minister reply
Once again, my hon. Friend is quite right, because if the remedial order goes through both Houses and the Supreme Court has not opined from the next day civil cases will reopen and military veterans will be involved in such actions.
Geoffrey Cox
Con
Torridge and Tavistock
Question
Is the Secretary of State using a highly technical and extremely unmeritorious argument?
Minister reply
I am delighted to have the support, on a matter of pure legal substance.
Peter Swallow
Lab
Bracknell
Question
Has our Committee considered all relevant evidence when creating both reports on this remedial order?
Minister reply
I am not doubting that the Committee examined all evidence available to it; I am disputing what evidence it had available to it.
Robin Swann
UUP
South Antrim
Question
Is there a political reason for the Northern Ireland Office to bring this measure forward: to placate Irish Government timeline?
Minister reply
I suspect very strongly that the hon. Gentleman is right, and it is bound up in the agreement made with the Irish Government.
Claire Hanna
SDLP
Belfast South and Mid Down
Question
Would supporting a parallel and comprehensive inquiry be logical to co-design by both Governments?
Minister reply
I would have been very open to that idea, but I believe the previous Administrations did not feel there was an opportunity to proceed in that way.
David Davis
Spelthorne
Con
Question
My hon. Friend’s comments tie in directly to those from the hon. Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna). In the Omagh bombing, the bomb was constructed in Ireland, the detonator was made—in a factory, in effect—in Ireland, the car came from Ireland, they disappeared back into Ireland afterwards, and there is a suggestion that the Irish special branch knew a great deal about it before it actually happened; there is a very good reason why the Irish Government do not want to have an inquiry into their part in the matter.
Minister reply
Indeed. Those are all things that we would all love to get to the bottom of.
Tonia Antoniazzi
Gower
Lab
Question
The hon. Gentleman should take a while to look through the recommendations contained in the Committee’s work on the troubles, take them seriously and have productive conversations on how to move this matter forward.
Minister reply
I take everything the hon. Lady’s Committee does incredibly seriously.
Lincoln Jopp
Brigg and Goole
Con
Question
The shadow Secretary of State makes a very powerful point, but it is worth putting it on the record that it is pretty unlikely his words will carry the day on the basis that there are eight Labour Back Benchers here to hear this debate about applying a guillotine to gut a piece of existing legislation without putting anything else in place.
Minister reply
Sadly, there are not many Labour Back Benchers here to hear the debate. I wish there were, because there is an alternative.
Lincoln Jopp
Brigg and Goole
Con
Question
How has he reconciled himself with this being the correct course for the Government to take—bringing in a remedial order that pulls a law out before we put a new one in?
Minister reply
There is an obligation on the Government under section 4 of the Human Rights Act: where they have been told by a court that legislation is incompatible with a convention right, they are duty-bound to remove that incompatibility.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Question
How is the hon. Member reconciled with the fact that this remedial order is being used as a guillotine to gut an existing piece of legislation before his Government have put something else in place?
Minister reply
To say that it is unusual for any Government to introduce a remedial order and a Bill, both addressing incompatibilities, on the same day would be an understatement. Indeed, the Committee’s long-held view is that primary legislation is always preferable to address incompatibilities, where that is available—a view re-emphasised in our second report.
Peter Swallow
Lab
Bracknell
Question
How can he reconcile with the fact that this remedial order is being used as a guillotine to gut an existing piece of legislation before his Government have put something else in place?
Minister reply
To say that it is unusual for any Government to introduce a remedial order and a Bill, both addressing incompatibilities, on the same day would be an understatement. Indeed, the Committee’s long-held view is that primary legislation is always preferable to address incompatibilities, where that is available—a view re-emphasised in our second report.
David Davis
Con
Goole and Pocklington
Question
Davis questioned the urgency and appropriateness of using a remedial order over primary legislation, citing concerns about constitutional impropriety and the potential for one-sided outcomes.
Sammy Wilson
DUP
East Antrim
Question
Wilson highlighted figures that demonstrated the Secretary of State's argument but also pointed out a potential differential in how cases are directed, suggesting it may favour certain groups over others.
Gregory Campbell
DUP
East Londonderry
Question
Campbell provided an example from the Shankill bomb to illustrate Davis's argument about the portrayal of IRA terrorists as victims, questioning the fairness and accuracy of such portrayals.
Question
He has glossed over another thing that he will potentially be voting for today: allowing Gerry Adams to claim compensation on the basis that his internment was illegal because the Minister of State signed the order not the Secretary of State. Would he like to tell his veteran friends and the people of Halesowen why he is happy to walk through the Lobby to vote to give Gerry Adams that right?
Minister reply
I am grateful for the question, but I believe it is important to end this legal wild west which has led to more litigation, uncertainty and distress for victims. The 2023 Act was defective leading to these issues.
Question
We cannot have immunity for one group and not another. The previous Government recognised that position—which is why their Act gave immunity to terrorists.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right, it is important for everyone involved, including the many veterans concerned about the situation in Northern Ireland, that we end this legal wild west.
Question
This is about the terrorist organisations seeking to rewrite the history of the troubles on an industrial scale using the fact that the Army and forces of law and order in Northern Ireland have all records, and they have none. This is therefore a one-sided operation.
Minister reply
I do not agree with exaggerations for political effect. Only one serviceperson has been convicted since 2010 on a suspended sentence.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Question
In the limited time available, I shall try to address a few of the basic issues, including those on which I intervened earlier. It became fairly obvious towards the end of the Secretary of State’s remarks, as a result of questioning from my colleagues on the Opposition Benches, that although there was much in his speech suggesting that he had to do what he is doing today, he is really doing it because he wants to do it. It was in the Government’s manifesto that they were going to repeal the legislation, and he is seizing the chance to strike it down at the first possible opportunity.
Calvin Bailey
Lab
Leyton and Wanstead
Question
Today I am going to try to speak as freely as I can about something in which I believe passionately. I will explain why I believe in the principles that underpin the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, which is why I consider it necessary that we keep working on the specifics during its next phase in Parliament.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Question
I still do not understand the reason for the rush to get the order through today. We have legislation coming before us, and surely it would have been reasonable to allow the courts to get on with their business and for us to legislate on the basis of what they bring forward.
Sarah Pochin
Reform
Runcorn and Helsby
Question
This remedial order is just another step by this Government towards repealing and overriding the previous Government’s legacy Act. This legislation will serve no purpose other than to pursue our brave veterans.
Alex Easton
Ind
North Down
Question
From the perspective of our veterans who served in Northern Ireland, the entire legacy framework is nothing short of deeply worrying. These are men and women, many of whom are now in their 70s and 80s, who put on the uniform of this country and operated under orders, rules, the law and unimaginable pressure to hold the line between democracy and terrorism.
Sorcha Eastwood
Alliance
Lagan Valley
Question
Welcomes the move to remove 'reconciliation' from the framework but expresses distress over remarks made by other MPs suggesting moral equivalence between veterans and terrorists. Argues that veterans did not ask for immunity and highlights the risks of a rewriting of history.
Sammy Wilson
DUP
East Antrim
Question
Argues that removing protections against legal challenges is an abuse of the law, perpetuating the narrative that terrorists lost their campaign and seeking to rewrite history. He cites statistics indicating 200 new civil cases will be opened, 120 against the MOD.
Carla Lockhart
DUP
Upper Bann
Question
Expresses opposition to the Government's approach as premature and reckless. Argues that it undermines the interests of veterans and victims, opening floodgates for legal challenges against security forces without providing avenues for compensation from paramilitaries.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
The door to justice must remain open. No equivalence can or should be drawn between the innocent victim and the perpetrator. Every family deserves a full and fair investigation into the death of their loved one, and there should be appropriate safeguards against vexatious troubles investigations.
Robin Swann
UUP
South Antrim
Question
Can I ask the House to pay tribute to and acknowledge the contribution of my hon. Friend the Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)? That emotion, that story and that heartfelt contribution to today’s debate are replicated across many houses across Northern Ireland, and indeed across this United Kingdom, in regard to those who have lost loved ones, both at the hands of terrorism and in other circumstances in Northern Ireland.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
Spelthorne
Question
The hon. Member questioned the timing and democratic process of bringing in a remedial order, expressing concerns about the rush to remove legal protections and the impact on former soldiers and victims' families.
Minister reply
Minister stated that the Government are taking a cautious approach by allowing judicial processes to complete before proceeding with the remedial order. He noted that the previous legislation's immunity provisions lacked public support and were legally unsound, necessitating this action.
Question
Does the Secretary of State believe his approach has achieved consensus in Northern Ireland?
Minister reply
The Minister responded that while there is no broad consensus, most contributions during the debate oppose immunity provisions. The Government's stance is clear: they do not agree with conditional immunity as it undermines accountability and trust.
Question
Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that conditional immunity in the legacy Act forms the foundation of post-1998 legislation?
Minister reply
Minister disagreed, arguing that the conditional nature of immunity does not guarantee its grant and is inconsistent with Labour's previous position on human rights obligations.
Question
If the Supreme Court rules against the remedial order, what will the Government do?
Minister reply
The Minister responded hypothetically that such a scenario would be addressed as it arises, emphasising adherence to judicial decisions.
David Reed
Con
Exmouth and Exeter East
Question
That is exactly what it is.
Minister reply
No, it is not about dredging up the past. Many Members have met with victims' families who live with the pain of losing loved ones for decades.
Gavin Robinson
SDLP
Question
I would like to place on record my appreciation for the agreement that this evening’s motion could be extended for double-time. I praise the usual channels, Government and Opposition Chief Whips, and the Leader of the House.
Minister reply
Not applicable; it is not a direct question but an acknowledgment.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.