1-14 of 14 results for answeredby:"Lord Coaker"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.21 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- answeredby:"Lord Coaker"
- We searched for
- answeringMember_ses:299790 OR answeringDept_ses:299790 OR askedToReplyAuthor_ses:299790
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to provide compensation to nuclear test veterans.
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to provide compensation to nuclear test veterans.
The Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their service and the huge contribution they have made to the UK’s security.
There is no specific compensation scheme for Nuclear Test Veterans and their families. Any veteran, including those of the nuclear tests, who believes they have suffered ill-health due to service has the right to apply for no-fault compensation under the War Pension Scheme if they served before 6 April 2005. War pensions are payable in respect of illness or injury as a result of service in the Armed Forces, with the benefit of reasonable doubt always given to the claimant. Decisions are medically certified and follow consideration of available service and medical evidence and carry full rights of appeal to an independent tribunal.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have received any information in the past two years about the health impacts on UK service men and women exposed to nuclear bomb testing in the Pacific in the 1950s.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have received any information in the past two years about the health impacts on UK service men and women exposed to nuclear bomb testing in the Pacific in the 1950s.
The Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their service and the huge contribution they made to the UK’s security. Since taking office, we have worked hard to listen, collaborate and work more closely with the nuclear test veteran community and to operate to a principle of maximum transparency.
I am aware of the concerns raised by some nuclear test veterans regarding the health impacts of their service and access to medical records. The government is keen to engage with that issue head on. Ministers commissioned officials to look at what information may be held by the Department in relation to the medical testing of Service personnel who took part in the UK nuclear weapons tests. This work is now nearing completion, and I will update the House in due course.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the letter to the Prime Minister from McCue Jury & Partners, and the firm's subsequent press release of 15 March, regarding the disclosure on 27 February under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 of a restricted 2014 report into...
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the letter to the Prime Minister from McCue Jury & Partners, and the firm's subsequent press release of 15 March, regarding the disclosure on 27 February under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 of a restricted 2014 report into...
The Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their service and the huge contribution they made to the UK’s security. This Government has reset the relationship with nuclear test veterans and the organisations that support them. We remain committed to listening to their concerns and working collaboratively to address them.
During a House of Commons debate last week, the Minister for Veterans and People reiterated the government’s commitment to maximum transparency and made a commitment to undertake work to fully understand the implications of the 2014 report and its handling, and to take action if necessary (Hansard, HC Deb, 25 March 2026, vol 783, col 377).
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the underlying environmental monitoring data from Christmas Island relating to the 1957–1958 nuclear tests has ever been disclosed to the courts in litigation brought by nuclear test veterans against the Ministry of Defence.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the underlying environmental monitoring data from Christmas Island relating to the 1957–1958 nuclear tests has ever been disclosed to the courts in litigation brought by nuclear test veterans against the Ministry of Defence.
The Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their service and the huge contribution they made to the UK’s security. This Government has reset the relationship with nuclear test veterans and the organisations that support them. We remain committed to listening to their concerns and working collaboratively to address them.
During a House of Commons debate last week, the Minister for Veterans and People reiterated the government’s commitment to maximum transparency and made a commitment to undertake work to fully understand the implications of the 2014 report and its handling, and to take action if necessary (Hansard, HC Deb, 25 March 2026, vol 783, col 377).
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the extent to which the disclosure of a restricted 2014 report into nuclear fallout contamination and subsequent suppression of the evidence thereof calls into question the evidence presented to the courts in the litigation preceding the judgment in Ministry...
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the extent to which the disclosure of a restricted 2014 report into nuclear fallout contamination and subsequent suppression of the evidence thereof calls into question the evidence presented to the courts in the litigation preceding the judgment in Ministry...
The Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their service and the huge contribution they made to the UK’s security. This Government has reset the relationship with nuclear test veterans and the organisations that support them. We remain committed to listening to their concerns and working collaboratively to address them.
During a House of Commons debate last week, the Minister for Veterans and People reiterated the government’s commitment to maximum transparency and made a commitment to undertake work to fully understand the implications of the 2014 report and its handling, and to take action if necessary (Hansard, HC Deb, 25 March 2026, vol 783, col 377).
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of President Trump’s statement on 30 October regarding the testing of nuclear weapons.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of President Trump’s statement on 30 October regarding the testing of nuclear weapons.
My Lords, the United Kingdom has ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty and continues to press for its entry into force. We remain committed to our voluntary moratorium on nuclear test explosions, having ceased nuclear testing in 1991. The nuclear testing policy of the United States is a matter for the US Government, and it would therefore be inappropriate to comment further.
My Lords, the United Kingdom has ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty and continues to press for its entry into force. We remain committed to our voluntary moratorium on nuclear test explosions, having ceased nuclear testing in 1991. The nuclear testing policy of the United States is a matter for the US Government, and it would therefore be inappropriate to comment further.
My Lords, the United Kingdom has ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty and continues to press for its entry into force. We remain committed to our voluntary moratorium on nuclear test explosions, having ceased nuclear testing in 1991. The nuclear testing policy of the United States is a matter for the US Government, and it would therefore be inappropriate to comment further.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of President Trump’s statement on 30 October regarding the testing of nuclear weapons.
The UK has a long-standing and important relationship with the United States—it is important to start out and say that on a number of occasions. The comprehensive test-ban treaty, as my noble friend has said, is a really successful treaty, and we continue to push and to do all we can to ensure that it is as effective as it is with as many states as possible. We look forward to everyone who signed it ratifying it in due course.
The UK has a long-standing and important relationship with the United States—it is important to start out and say that on a number of occasions. The comprehensive test-ban treaty, as my noble friend has said, is a really successful treaty, and we continue to push and to do all we can to ensure that it is as effective as it is with as many states as possible. We look forward to everyone who signed it ratifying it in due course.
My Lords, it is easy to look on this as some sort of playground bravado by President Trump, who clearly did not understand the implications of, or what was meant by, the trials of delivery systems that Putin was conducting. With him having made his statement, President Putin wanted to show how tough he was and made his statement about doing tests again. This would be probably quite amusing if it was not so incredibly dangerous. The comprehensive test-ban treaty is one of the few treaties regarding nuclear weapons that are still in existence; many have fallen by the wayside. We are less safe than we used to be because of that. If the comprehensive test-ban treaty is broken, it opens a Pandora’s box. All of us will be far less safe. That is extremely worrying.
I know the Minister cannot say very much in response to my Question—in effect, it was nothing, but those are wonderful. However, even though something may not happen because the Department of Energy in
America is unable to do a test straight away—it will take a couple of years and cost billions of dollars, so this thing may go away— and even though, as he says, it is their business, does he believe that the Government should make it very clear to the Americans how much we support keeping the test ban treaty in place and that we will be very disappointed if there is any break to that?
The noble Lord has a lot of experience in these matters, and he knows that numerous conversations go on and numerous efforts are made by numerous countries, in ways we cannot often speak about in this Chamber. Whether it is India and Pakistan, or other countries, numerous debates and discussions take place to ensure that we are as safe as we possibly can be. As he knows, the parties to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty will meet in New York next year—I think is an important statement that it is taking place in New York. It is a really important treaty. We have the comprehensive test-ban treaty, and we have the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. I think sometimes that what countries such as us should do, as well as recognising the difficulties and problems, is to continue to push the importance of those treaties and to do all we can to ensure their continued success.
The noble Lord has a lot of experience in these matters, and he knows that numerous conversations go on and numerous efforts are made by numerous countries, in ways we cannot often speak about in this Chamber. Whether it is India and Pakistan, or other countries, numerous debates and discussions take place to ensure that we are as safe as we possibly can be. As he knows, the parties to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty will meet in New York next year—I think is an important statement that it is taking place in New York. It is a really important treaty. We have the comprehensive test-ban treaty, and we have the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. I think sometimes that what countries such as us should do, as well as recognising the difficulties and problems, is to continue to push the importance of those treaties and to do all we can to ensure their continued success.
My Lords, we saw the PrepCom for the nuclear non-proliferation treaty—or NPT—conference, which is due to meet again next year. We have five signatories. In light of what we have heard from the rhetoric of Russia, and the actions that others have taken, what assessment is being made of the potential success of the NPT meeting next May? Further, linked to the recent conflict we saw between India and Pakistan, what extra efforts have been made to ensure that those countries also sign the NPT?
The noble Lord makes a good point. With all the questions and my comments so far, it is extremely important that we do not let rhetoric cause a problem. The question that the noble Lord has
posed is important. As I have said in my answers so far, it is important that we talk about the success of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. We have not conducted a nuclear test explosion since 1991. The United States and others have conformed to that as well. People must be really careful in the use of rhetoric in whatever circumstance. Our debates and discussions on these matters are looked at and pored over. I take the noble Lord’s point very seriously. We need to be very careful in how we discuss these matters while having the right to discuss them.
The noble Lord makes a good point. With all the questions and my comments so far, it is extremely important that we do not let rhetoric cause a problem. The question that the noble Lord has
posed is important. As I have said in my answers so far, it is important that we talk about the success of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty. We have not conducted a nuclear test explosion since 1991. The United States and others have conformed to that as well. People must be really careful in the use of rhetoric in whatever circumstance. Our debates and discussions on these matters are looked at and pored over. I take the noble Lord’s point very seriously. We need to be very careful in how we discuss these matters while having the right to discuss them.
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that this is the latest instance of the potential use of nuclear weapons being referred to loosely by leaders of the recognised weapon states, on which President Putin gave the lead on several occasions when he spoke about it in the context of the Ukraine conflict? That is surely a lamentable change from the taboo on talking about these matters since the end of the Cold War. Does he think that we would do better to work at the non-proliferation treaty review conference next year for a reaffirmation of the view that a nuclear war must not be fought and cannot be won?
We encourage all states to join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It has been a huge vehicle by which we have worked together to keep the world safe. This Government accept, as previous Governments have done and as do many Governments across the world, that the nuclear deterrent is part of the security architecture of the world. Part of having a nuclear deterrent is to deter from war, deter from aggression. The restatement of the deterrent policy is consistent with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, under which the noble Lord will know that the UK is allowed to have weapons.
We encourage all states to join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. It has been a huge vehicle by which we have worked together to keep the world safe. This Government accept, as previous Governments have done and as do many Governments across the world, that the nuclear deterrent is part of the security architecture of the world. Part of having a nuclear deterrent is to deter from war, deter from aggression. The restatement of the deterrent policy is consistent with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, under which the noble Lord will know that the UK is allowed to have weapons.
In a conflict-beset world, a credible nuclear deterrent is unarguable, but macho posturing by the leaders of the United States and Russia is an alarming development that undermines the non-proliferation treaty. In response to the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, will the Government take a lead to encourage or persuade India, Pakistan and Israel to sign that treaty, reaffirm it, strengthen it and make it clear exactly what has been said? A nuclear war cannot be won and must not be fought.
What I can confirm is that there will be no reduction in our capability of ensuring that the nuclear deterrent is effective and that it remains so seven days a week, 365 days a year and 24 hours a day. That is the commitment that the Government make. I hear what the noble Baroness says about the AWE. That is about looking at reshaping how that important body works. The Government have committed £31 billion to the Dreadnought programme, with a £10 billion contingency. We have committed £15 billion in this Parliament to the development of a new warhead. That is a Government who are committed, as the last Government were, to spending billions of pounds on maintaining the credibility of our nuclear deterrent, which, as I said in answer to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, is essential to the global security of the world.
What I can confirm is that there will be no reduction in our capability of ensuring that the nuclear deterrent is effective and that it remains so seven days a week, 365 days a year and 24 hours a day. That is the commitment that the Government make. I hear what the noble Baroness says about the AWE. That is about looking at reshaping how that important body works. The Government have committed £31 billion to the Dreadnought programme, with a £10 billion contingency. We have committed £15 billion in this Parliament to the development of a new warhead. That is a Government who are committed, as the last Government were, to spending billions of pounds on maintaining the credibility of our nuclear deterrent, which, as I said in answer to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, is essential to the global security of the world.
My Lords, following on from what the Minister has just very helpfully said, in relation to our own United Kingdom nuclear defence capability, we have seen just this week that between 400 and 500 jobs will be put at risk at the Atomic Weapons Establishment. The Government claim that the workforce needs to be reshaped so that it is fit for the future. However, in a time of growing international insecurity, can the Minister confirm that there will be no reduction in staffing for our nuclear weapons capability?
As I have said, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is an essential part of the Government’s policy. We remain committed under that treaty to the aspiration to a nuclear-free world, which may seem a long way off but is our aspiration. All I can say with respect to this is to reiterate the complete commitment that the Government have to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and to the meeting next year in New York. We want that conference to be a success.
The UK remains an active participant in all the nuclear non-proliferation treaty forums, alongside the commitment to maintain for as long as is necessary our nuclear deterrent. The commitment that we have to that nuclear non-proliferation treaty is important as well. That is good UK government policy.
As I have said, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is an essential part of the Government’s policy. We remain committed under that treaty to the aspiration to a nuclear-free world, which may seem a long way off but is our aspiration. All I can say with respect to this is to reiterate the complete commitment that the Government have to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and to the meeting next year in New York. We want that conference to be a success.
The UK remains an active participant in all the nuclear non-proliferation treaty forums, alongside the commitment to maintain for as long as is necessary our nuclear deterrent. The commitment that we have to that nuclear non-proliferation treaty is important as well. That is good UK government policy.
My Lords, I draw the attention of your Lordships’ House to my entry in the register of interests, particularly as vice-chair of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, which I am a consultant to as well. Every European NATO member has ratified the 1996 nuclear test-ban treaty. In addition to a commitment to Article VI, the commitment by the five nuclear weapon states to the CTBT was essential to the indefinite extension of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 1995. My noble friend the Minister will be aware that former US officials who have had responsibility for their nuclear arsenal have stated publicly that new US nuclear tests are unnecessary, unwise and unwelcome. As those officials have done, have our Government assessed the impact on the NPT’s future if there are renewed explosive nuclear tests by any of the five—including the US and the UK?
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will provide compensation to veterans, and where appropriate their descendants, for injuries or illnesses caused by radiation exposure from nuclear tests (1) in the UK, or (2) authorised by the UK.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will provide compensation to veterans, and where appropriate their descendants, for injuries or illnesses caused by radiation exposure from nuclear tests (1) in the UK, or (2) authorised by the UK.
This Government is deeply grateful to all those who participated in the UK nuclear testing programme. We recognise their Service and the huge contribution they have made to the UK’s security.
Around 22,000 Nuclear Test Veterans were considered in an analysis of the data in the Nuclear Weapons Test Participants Study – a long-term epidemiological study of the health of veterans who were present at UK nuclear testing between 1952 and 1967. Four analyses of this data to date, concluded that Nuclear Test Veterans have a similar incidence of cancer and, in general, a longer healthy life expectancy than the control group. The possibility that test participation caused an increase in risk of leukaemia cannot be ruled out. Our policy is therefore to award a war pension for claims for leukaemia having clinical onset within 25 years of presence at test sites.
Nuclear Test Veterans and their entitled family members are already eligible to apply for compensation under the War Pension Scheme. There is no time limit for claiming, however if a claim is made more than seven years after termination of service, as would be the case for Nuclear Test Veterans, the claimant is granted the benefit of doubt when there is uncertainty about whether the disablement is linked to or worsened by their service. Factors such as being on operations or in a hazardous environment can support a service-related claim. Claims handlers will review historical records, including medical records, to establish a causal link to service for Nuclear Test Veterans seeking compensation.
This Government has no current plans to develop a specific compensation scheme for either Nuclear Test Veterans or their families.
Ministers are keen to engage with the issue of records head on and have repeatedly met with MPs and groups in the nuclear test veteran community to discuss a range of topics. The Minister for Veterans and People, Al Carns, has commissioned officials across the Ministry of Defence, as a priority, to look at what information may be held by the Department. An update on the progress to date will be provided before summer recess.
Four analyses of an independent epidemiological study have previously been carried out, the latest report was published in 2022. This report concluded that overall levels of mortality and cancer incidence in nuclear test veterans have continued to be similar to those in a matched Service control group, and lower than in the general population.