Former Gurkha Soldiers' Rights
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S3M-4032, in the name of Jim Tolson, on the rights of former Gurkha soldiers. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament welcomes the victory for the rights of Gurkha soldiers achieved in the Commons defeat on 29 April 2009 when MPs voted by 267 to 246 for a Liberal Democrat motion offering all Gurkhas equal right of residence in Britain; believes that this is a historic victory for the Gurkhas who have served the United Kingdom so bravely; notes the widespread opposition to the UK Government's proposed guidelines, which are considered to permit only a small minority of Gurkhas and their families to settle while preventing the vast majority from doing so; believes that the UK Government's decision fails to recognise the long history of dedicated service by Gurkha soldiers; welcomes the support for justice for the Gurkha soldiers by former Gurkha officer, Major Bill MacKay of Dunfermline; commends the 70 years of continuous service given by Sergeant Sunar Gurung, who served with Major MacKay, and Sergeant Gurung's six sons who all served with the Gurkha regiment, and believes that such service should be recognised.
The Gurkhas have served in the British Army for almost 200 years and, with 26 Victoria Crosses, the Brigade of Gurkhas is among the most decorated British Army regiments. More than 200,000 Gurkhas fought in the two world wars, and in the past 50 years they have served in Hong Kong, Malaysia, Borneo, Cyprus, the Falklands and Kosovo, and now in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is no wonder, therefore, that there was widespread opposition to the United Kingdom Government's proposed Gurkha residency guidelines, which would have permitted only a small minority of Gurkhas and their families to settle and prevented the vast majority from doing so. Under the Government's provisions, announced in April 2009, Gurkhas who retired before 1997 needed to satisfy conditions that were for the most part unachievable. Few issues have united people in such a way, across the parties and across the UK. No wonder the Government had to rethink the issue. Gurkhas who retired before 1997 and who wanted to live here had to have served five times longer than the time required of a Commonwealth soldier or of the Gurkhas who retired from service after 1997.
Interestingly, before July 1997, regular Gurkha soldiers were not permitted to serve 20 years. Riflemen served for 15 years, so only a small number would actually have qualified. The same applied to the other proposed conditions, which would have made it nearly impossible for the majority of Gurkhas to qualify. The conditions seemed to be carefully designed to ensure that only a small number of Gurkhas could successfully seek settlement.
One Gurkha, Mr Pun, who won the Victoria Cross for storming a Japanese gun post in the second world war, was denied entry to the UK because he could not show a strong enough link to the country. I am delighted to learn that he has now been granted a visa to visit the UK and apply for indefinite leave to remain.
On 29 April, there was an historic victory for the Liberal Democrat motion in Westminster to offer all Gurkhas equal right of residence in Britain. The Government was defeated by a vote of 267 to 246. That was the first success for any Opposition motion for more than 30 years and only the third Government defeat in the Commons since 1997. The UK Government was forced to retreat and rethink its strategy. On 21 May, it announced a change of heart: Gurkhas with more than four years' service and their immediate family would be given the option to make their homes in the UK. It was success at long last.
That U-turn would not have happened without the high-profile campaign run by Joanna Lumley and other supporters of the Gurkhas' rights. Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems have been campaigning for a better deal for serving and retired Gurkha soldiers for more than five years. What started as a small, local campaign became part of a huge national campaign fought in the courts, the media and the UK Parliament. To quote Nick Clegg, the Lib Dem leader:
"If someone is willing to die for this country, they should be allowed to live in our country".
That phrase will strike a chord with many veterans and serving soldiers from around the world.
No doubt we all have constituents who served alongside Gurkhas in world war one, world war two, the Falklands or, more recently, Iraq and Afghanistan. Former Gurkha officer Major Bill MacKay from my constituency tells of serving with Sergeant Sunar Gurung, whose six sons also served with the regiment. Between them, they gave well over 70 years' service to this country. I am delighted to see that Bill MacKay and his wife, Sheila, are in the public gallery for this debate.
It is not only this Parliament or the UK Parliament that supports the efforts of Gurkhas at home and abroad. The Gurkha Welfare Trust supports the Gurkhas with residency claims and the retired Gurkhas in Nepal who do not receive a pension for military service. In particular, it supports those who served in world war two or the conflicts shortly afterwards. The trust's core activity is the provision of a monthly welfare pension to 10,000 Gurkha soldiers—and widows—who did not serve the 15 years needed to earn an army pension. For many, it is the only source of income and all that stands between them and destitution.
The trust runs 19 area welfare centres throughout Nepal and one in India. They are manned by retired Gurkhas who investigate cases of hardship and distress and recommend appropriate aid. It also runs a medical scheme for the welfare of pensioners and their dependants, which provided treatment free of charge to 122,000 cases last year alone.
One of the trust's most successful fundraising events takes place in Scotland each year. In August, the Gurkha Highland march will take place with six serving Gurkhas and a Gurkha British officer. It involves a 200-mile march across Scotland from Mallaig to Stonehaven. I wish them well with that endeavour, and I am sure that the Parliament will join me in doing so. In fact, I hope to join them in Stonehaven on 17 August on the completion of their march.
Generations of Gurkhas have been prepared to fight and die for the UK and should be treated fairly and equally. Following the historic vote in Westminster on 29 April and the subsequent announcement on 21 May 2009, they will be treated fairly at long last in recognition of the long history of dedicated service that they have given to this country. It was a hard-fought battle but one worthy of a 27th Gurkha Victoria Cross.
I welcome the debate, which has been initiated by Jim Tolson. It is apposite that we are having it in the run-up to armed forces day on 27 June.
It is absolutely true that the armed forces have great respect for any soldier who fights within the ranks, no matter where they were raised or from where they were recruited. The Gurkhas are almost the stuff of legend. People hear about those strong and committed soldiers and the fiercely contested recruitment process that goes on in Nepal to win the right to be a Gurkha soldier. There was therefore general revulsion when people realised, as a result of a campaign, how the Gurkha widows were being treated. There was also outrage with the recognition that the Government at Westminster tried to put what I would call disingenuous conditions on the right of retired Gurkhas to live here. Jim Tolson talked about the very basic condition, which was that soldiers had to serve 20 years for automatic qualification, but rank-and-file Gurkhas serve only 15 years. That seemed a very strange condition.
The Gurkha campaign did not arrive from nowhere. A lot of people have worked for the campaign for many years, and it has been fuelled by individual cases of injustice. At the time, I was shocked by the story of Honorary Lieutenant Tul Bahadur Pun, who had to get special leave to enter the UK for medical treatment in 2007 and in fact had to rely on the charity of the Gurkha brigade for welfare support while he was here. This was a soldier who won the Victoria Cross for his bravery in Burma in 1944, when he took on and defeated Japanese machine-gun bunkers single-handedly after they had killed the rest of his section. After he was refused treatment at a national health service hospital, he was so disgusted that he turned in his medals at Downing Street. I understand that he was told that he was due the NHS thousands of pounds in payment for the treatment that he had already received. I pay tribute to Nick Clegg, who joined Mr Pun on that demonstration in June 2008.
By one of those strange coincidences that come round, it turned out that that soldier had saved the life of Joanna Lumley's father by carrying him back to a medical post under fire after he had been shot. As we all now know, it was after reading her father's diary that Ms Lumley became involved in the Gurkha campaign—and a very good profile she gave to it. We should all honour her for that, as well as honouring all the other people who have campaigned so hard over the years, such as Major Bill MacKay of Dunfermline, who was mentioned by Jim Tolson and who is mentioned in the motion.
As I said, those who fight for this country deserve equal respect, whether they come from Scotland, England, Wales, Ireland, Commonwealth countries or Nepal. I believe that the armed forces have that feeling and give that recognition. My colleague the Minister for Schools and Skills, Keith Brown, served alongside the Gurkhas in the Falklands when he was a marine. As Jim Tolson said, Gurkhas have been part of the army for almost 200 years, and 200,000 Gurkhas fought in the two world wars, with 45,000 believed to have lost their lives fighting for Britain. I absolutely endorse the point that, if someone is willing to die for this country, they should be allowed to live in it.
When the then Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, made her announcements about the UK Government turnaround, she made some commitments, one of which was that the 1,400 outstanding applications for settlement that were currently with the UK Border Agency would be processed on the basis of the new policy as a matter of urgency before 11 June. That date has now passed, and I have been unable to find out whether the target was met. I hope that someone here who has been closely involved will be able to find out and reassure people that the action has matched the rhetoric.
I congratulate Jim Tolson on bringing his motion to the chamber. I agree with everything that he said when he outlined the United Kingdom's historic and important bond with the Gurkhas over many years. The Commons victory over the Government earlier this year, to which he referred, was a hard-won victory for the Gurkhas and for basic decency.
As Jim Tolson said, it is right that all pre-1997 Gurkhas with more than four years service and their dependents should have the right to settle in this country. Conservatives believe that former Gurkhas—and indeed other veterans who are not UK nationals—have contributed to our society and have therefore earned the presumption that they should be allowed to settle here. It was never justifiable to deny a group of people who have long lived in the nation's affections, and who have risked—and whose members often gave—their lives for its protection the right to live in the UK.
As Jim Tolson said, it is a shame that the UK Government had to be dragged kicking and screaming through the courts and then through the crowds of Gurkhas outside Parliament before it finally did the right thing. It is a shame that not a single Labour member is prepared to contribute to the debate—perhaps they are too embarrassed.
I agree with what Jim Tolson said when he referred to Joanna Lumley, who, in redoubtable fashion, led the campaign to win rights for Gurkhas, with support from across the political spectrum. The campaign was based on decency, common sense and fairness, which is why it won the day. I think that we all enjoyed the sight on television of Joanna Lumley publicly embarrassing Phil Woolas and other Labour ministers, while eloquently and gently reminding us all of the role that the Gurkhas have played in defending this country over the centuries.
The Gurkhas have an important role in the British Army and are renowned for their loyalty, discipline and courage in battle. Linda Fabiani reminded us of the fiercely contested recruitment battle in Nepal. In 2008, the British Army recruited 230 Gurkhas but received more than 28,000 applications from young men. It shows how important the opportunity to serve in the Gurkhas is to young men in Nepal.
It is hard to believe the attitude adopted by the Labour Government at Westminster when we consider that about 200,000 Gurkhas fought for Britain in the first and second world wars, and that more than 45,000 Gurkhas have died in British uniform. The Gurkhas have given total commitment to Britain and the British Army, and it is welcome news that they can now settle here. When a Conservative Government is elected at the next general election, we will honour that agreement and ensure that Gurkhas who want to come here are treated as honoured veterans of our armed forces.
In the few moments I have left, I want to mention the Black Watch, which is currently serving in Afghanistan. Like the Gurkhas, it is a proud regiment. The Black Watch is based in the area of Fife and Tayside that Jim Tolson and I represent. Sadly, two Black Watch soldiers died recently in Afghanistan. Everyone in the regiment will feel that loss deeply.
Whether they are from the Black Watch or the Gurkhas, all those who contribute to the British Army should be valued. It is hugely significant that a victory has been won to allow Gurkhas who have served this country to come and settle here. I congratulate all those who brought about that victory.
I, too, thank Jim Tolson for securing the debate. I agree completely with the sentiment in his motion.
We have heard statistics on the Gurkhas, but Scotland has an almost direct literary connection with that society through George MacDonald Fraser, who I regard as one of the greatest Scottish novelists of the 20th century, with his stories of the great game.
The Nepali community is a fixture of contemporary Scotland that I believe is of increasing importance. Like the Scots, they are a martial people who have loyally served in two world wars. However, they can still find it difficult to cope with a fast-changing subcontinent.
I have a certain personal link with that, because my late wife was a Buddhist. She was a rather odd type of Buddhist: an Anglican Buddhist—there is such a thing. Her belief gave her great satisfaction and great courage when coping with the illness from which she died. It is a personal link with that type of belief.
Along with Buddhists in this country, I recently played some part in trying to strengthen the Nepali community here and to retain in it the activist Kishor Dangol. Through him, I have come into contact with the Nepali community as a whole, which is one in which serving Gurkha officers and retirees are blended with entrepreneurs, doctors, medical men and people working in social work. They are a resilient and logical group of people. Last Friday, we were able to agree on a scheme of action for creating a—[Interruption.]
Order. The member has an electronic device near him.
I apologise. I shall throw it remote from the microphone.
I was struck by how logical and well organised their plea was. They would like a Nepali centre in Scotland, which they are prepared to organise completely themselves. They are anxious to serve our country as well as their own tradition. They are a very logical and possessed group, and in many ways they have coped much better than others with the aftermath of the experience of modern war. They seem to have a resilience that aids them in dealing with that.
That area of the Himalayas has contributed two links to the subcontinent in which Scotland has had a role; the military and the botanical. Would it not be marvellous if we could get a solution from the present-day Nepalese to our problem with the rhododendron, that curse of the Highlands and a upas tree of our own growing? I think that we probably will get that action because the Nepalese are accustomed to that type of landscape and territory. Members have referred to the notion of the Nepalese taking their place among the folk of the Highlands.
We ought not just to welcome the deal that has been done, which has erased a very bad chapter in our treatment of our former soldiers; we should try to bring the Gurkhas into our society in Scotland so that we can profit from their hardiness, effectiveness and awareness of the natural world. We should express respect for the services that have been done to Britain and Scotland by the Gurkhas and the Nepali community as a whole. I hope that we develop that co-operation in the future.
I, too, congratulate Jim Tolson on securing the debate on a substantive and worthwhile subject. In my role as the minister with responsibility for veterans affairs, I am replying on behalf of the Scottish Government. Like Murdo Fraser, I think that it is a matter of regret that no one from the party that is in government in London has been bothered even to sit through the debate, let alone to speak in it.
I associate myself with Murdo Fraser's remarks about the Black Watch. Both my grandfathers served in the Black Watch during the first world war and one of them was seriously injured as a young man. Our thoughts are with the Black Watch and all the other serving personnel in Afghanistan and in the other 19 countries where members of the armed forces are currently serving.
I pay special tribute to the work that Major Bill MacKay has done in campaigning for the Gurkhas.
It may be helpful if I run through some of the figures concerning the impact of the U-turn by the UK Government. In 2004, the UK Government granted the Gurkhas the right of settlement in the UK if they had served on or after 1 July 1997. Since then, more than 6,000 Gurkhas and their families have settled in the UK. When I became the minister with responsibility for veterans affairs, I asked my officials to find out, through the Gurkha Welfare Trust, how many of those 6,000 Gurkhas live in Scotland. It appears that not many—if any—Gurkhas are currently permanently living in Scotland. According to the campaigners, the UK Government's ruling denied residency to almost 36,000 Gurkhas.
As we have heard, the Home Secretary then made her announcement on 21 May. As a result of the new arrangements, between 10,000 and 15,000 applications are expected to be made over the next two years by Gurkhas who want to come and live in the UK. Those will be in addition to the 1,400 applications that were already outstanding with the UK Border Agency. As Linda Fabiani said, we were promised that the 1,400 applications would be processed by 11 June. We will attempt to find out the exact status of those applications. I shall write to every member who has participated in tonight's debate to update them on the position once we receive that information from the UK Government.
As Jim Tolson said, 200,000 Gurkhas served in two world wars and, down the years, 26 of them have received the Victoria Cross. As all members have said, loyalty is a two-way process. For 200 years, the Gurkhas have been very loyal in the fights in which this country has been involved. We owe a loyalty to the Gurkhas.
There are few subjects on which the average person in the street feels—almost unanimously—a sense of injustice, but, on the day that Phil Woolas announced that the Gurkhas would not be given the right to settle in the UK, one could almost feel the sense of disgust and anger, let alone disappointment, not just among Opposition politicians but among the ordinary people of this country both north and south of the border. No matter where in the UK they are from, people recognise the debt of gratitude that we owe to the Gurkhas.
I am delighted that Joanna Lumley, working with the Gurkhas, was able to gain the support of all the Opposition parties—on this occasion led, to be fair, by Nick Clegg—to secure the reversal of the decision that was made by Phil Woolas. When I have the pleasure of meeting Mr Woolas in London next month, I will take the opportunity to convey to him—pleasantly—the feelings of the Scottish Parliament about how the Gurkhas have been treated by the UK Government.
We are united on the Gurkhas. My only wish is that many more of them would come and settle in Scotland, where they would benefit from all the work that we are doing for all the veterans in Scotland in conjunction with, and with the co-operation of, the Ministry of Defence and the armed forces. Indeed, I had a meeting with John Hutton last month—just before he left the UK Government—to develop further the range of services that we provide to veterans in Scotland.
It is with great pleasure that I can say, on behalf of the Scottish Government, that we are at one with Jim Tolson, Murdo Fraser, Linda Fabiani, Christopher Harvie and everyone else who believes in the justice of the Gurkhas' cause.
Meeting closed at 17:28.