Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Overseas Operations: Negligence and Personal Injury Claims

Monday 2 November 2020 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The Overseas Operations Bill will not prevent service personnel and veterans from bringing personal injury claims against the MOD for overseas operations.
  • Many veterans' organisations are raising concerns about the six-year limit included in the Bill.
  • The Government maintains that the Bill does not breach the armed forces covenant.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Bell Ribeiro-Addy Lab Clapham and Brixton Hill
Veterans
Context

The overseas operations Bill is under scrutiny, particularly its impact on veterans making allegations of negligence or personal injury against the Ministry of Defence.

Question

What assessment has been made of the potential effect of the overseas operations Bill on the number of veterans who make allegations of (a) negligence and (b) personal injury against his Department?

Answer from Johnny Mercer

As I said in response to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Workington (Mark Jenkinson), the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill will not prevent service personnel and veterans from bringing personal injury claims against the MOD in relation to overseas operations within six years from either the date of incident or the date of knowledge. Claims by service personnel and veterans that are not related to overseas operations are unaffected by this Bill.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Bell Ribeiro-Addy Lab Clapham and Brixton Hill
Veterans
Context

The Poppy Appeal campaign director, Charles Byrne, raised concerns about the six-year long-stop clause in the Bill being a breach of the armed forces covenant.

Question

Given that many veterans' organisations are raising concerns about the six-year limit, will the Government think again about it and commit to promoting awareness on how to bring civil claims against the MOD?

Answer from Johnny Mercer

It is not true to say that many veterans' organisations take the same view as the Legion on this case. Neither the Legion nor the Government are the guarantor of the armed forces covenant. I am absolutely 100% sure that this does not breach the armed forces covenant. If we were to wilfully translate it in a way in which it was never intended, then I accept what has been said, but that is not what the armed forces covenant is there to do. It is there to ensure that there is no disadvantage for those who serve, and this Government are the first to legislate, in the armed forces Bill next year, to make it illegal to discriminate against servicemen and women and veterans for their service. I am afraid therefore that I disagree on that point. It is a good Bill. It is fair and proportionate, and people should support it tomorrow.

Partly answered

Not addressed: reconsidering the six-year limit and promoting awareness for civil claims

How: Disagreement With The Legion'S View, Defending The Armed Forces Covenant

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)