This year commemorates all those who fought in the Falklands conflict. We should not forget the sacrifice made by many to liberate those islands from an aggressive Argentinian invasion by a dictator. Many of us will not forget that conflict: it shaped our own childhood and upbringing. My own regiment served there, alongside those of other hon. Members, who will know veterans well. To send a force 8,000 miles to stand for Britain's values and uphold international law was some achievement then; it would be some achievement now.

My hon. Friend makes a strong point on behalf of the Welsh soldier, the Welsh airman—RAF Valley is on Anglesey—and the Welsh Navy. The Welsh are at the forefront of our responses around the world: not only did the Queen's Dragoon Guards, the Welsh cavalry, recently return from Mali, but the 1st Battalion the Royal Welsh is one of the main battle groups in Estonia enhancing the forward presence. Wales adds a lot to the United Kingdom and to the British Army. Without a Welshman in your platoon, you are not doing very well, in my experience.

The simple reality is that we do not know how many ex-soldiers are fighting in Ukraine. Obviously, at the beginning of the conflict, we all publicly made statements to try to deter people from doing so. The two former soldiers who have been captured were themselves living in Ukraine or half-Ukrainian. Like others, I am saddened by the loss of the other former veteran who was reported killed recently. As far as the individuals are concerned who decided of their own volition to go and fight separately from the United Kingdom or any of its serving personnel, we are unaware of the total number, although there are estimates.

Let me respond to the right hon. Gentleman's last point first. No one has said that I will not do the same. What I have said is that we are threat-based. We have in fact increased the number from 72,000 to 72,500, and increased that number by a further 500, to a total of 73,000. We have done that in response to a need as we shake up the Army. As for the next few years, Members may recall that our spending review started earlier than those in the rest of Whitehall. We have a commitment to continue with 2% for the duration of that spending review. We were the first country in Europe—we seem to get punished by the Opposition for this—to increase our spending significantly to supply weapons to Ukraine to ensure that we keep pace with many of the threats that we face around Europe.

I can certainly give that assurance. We will give the Ukrainians as much as we can. We will support them with logistics, training and equipment to give them every chance of ensuring that Putin fails.

I think the hon. Gentleman could have written that 20 years ago, when his party was not delivering a national shipbuilding strategy or anything like one, did not have a shipbuilding pipeline as large as ours, did not invest in the shipyards in the way in which we are going to, and did not do anything other than spout this same old claptrap. The simple reality is that we will be building more ships in Britain with British supply chains, whether that is for the Navy or for other Government Departments. As ever, the hon. Gentleman is playing to the crowd.

My hon. Friend has hit upon the key point. For the last two months or so, discussions have followed two tracks: supporting Ukraine in the fight tomorrow and ensuring they are secure within their borders when this conflict ends. The UK is leading both efforts by bringing together international support and mobilising the UK defence industry.

None.

The Royal Navy continues to accelerate its drive towards uncrewed capabilities, including remotely operated and fully autonomous systems. The minehunting capability programme is full of opportunity, and I know that my hon. Friend will want to speak to the Minister for Defence Procurement about the role businesses in his constituency can play in it.

I know that the hon. Lady will be familiar with the phrase “dodgy dossier” because her party produced one historically. The current Labour procurement dossier double counts funds and confuses retirement of old systems as waste.

I know that the Romanian Government were grateful for the visit of the APPG. On Friday morning, I held a trilateral with the Romanian and Ukrainian deputy Defence Ministers. Snake Island was to the fore in our discussions.

Yes, I pay tribute to the right hon. Lady's constituent and thank him for that work. We often forget it was not just the Army, Marines, and Navy; it was also the merchant ships of the merchant navy, with people who suddenly found themselves on the way to the south Atlantic.

I totally agree that this is an important subject. My experience of the cookhouse in Aldershot has always been very satisfactory, but we acknowledge there is great variation in the service and are re-letting the contract for improved service by 2025.

On that last question, I am happy to confirm the previous announcement that we now have General Nesmith on the Army Board, the first woman to hold that position. We have set out a lot of steps in reply to the report from my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Sarah Atherton) on women in the armed forces.

Yes, it is. We committed £6.6 billion to research and development in the defence Command Paper to make sure we are fighting not yesterday's battles but tomorrow's. We are taking steps to work internationally and on a sovereign basis to see how we can defend against both hypersonic and other types of missiles.

Yes, I think we would.

I agree. I hope my hon. Friend and I will meet Colonel James Phillips in Wales very soon.

Taiwan is obviously a clear and growing point of tension in the Pacific. I regularly speak to our allies, both in NATO and further afield, about those tensions. Here in the United Kingdom we are reminded of Hong Kong's recent experience and what the read-across could mean for other people who are trying to live freely and within the rule of law.

I remember, in my formative years politically, asking the late Mr Bruce Kent a question when I was at school. The reality is that Britain's position is one of multilateral disarmament. It is not a position of unilateral nuclear disarmament.

I am pleased that we have parity of esteem and parity of provision through the excellent NHS “Op Courage,” which is available for veterans with mental health needs. I look forward to showcasing it to my hon. Friend.

I join my hon. Friend in thanking them. I hope we have an opportunity to make a joint visit.

We do put on record our thanks and we remember those people with gratitude and a sense of deep compassion about the legacy that this conflict left.

My hon. Friend is right. If Britain stands for anything, it is that no matter whether 8,000 miles away in the south Atlantic or in Ukraine, Britain will stand up for its values and, if necessary, fight for them.

I totally acknowledge that there have been problems with the awards of war pensions and armed forces compensation. I would be very happy to take up that case and expedite it, and write to my hon. Friend.

I was there only a few weeks ago. I think the whole House would like to give our thanks to the armed forces for the work they did over that weekend and for all the hours of rehearsal they do, sometimes in the middle of the night, which none of us ever see, to make things very special. From Trooping the Colour on the Thursday all the way through to the pageant, our armed forces did us proud, as did a number of the armed forces from the Commonwealth, which were also in attendance and on parade that day.