Thanks BAFF for the ongoing coverage of the Troubles Bill and related muddles. As the Federation's original chairman and currently assisting with the ongoing BAFF restructuring, I thought it would be worth reminding ourselves of the Federation's position over the years on the applicability of law to military operations - and especially on so-called 'legacy investigations' taking place years after the alleged events. 

Other organisations will have their own points of view, but the basic priorities for a representative membership body like BAFF are the legitimate interests of our members and, by extension, the generality of armed forces serving personnel and veterans.

It's common enough on social media and news-media reader pages to see comments like 'I have never been in the military so it's not for me to judge their actions' - while in effect actually making a judgement.

For our part, we have never argued that while troops are on operations, 'anything goes'.

A BAFF spokesman made these comments to the BBC Today programme in June 2011 about the Iraq Historic Allegations Inquiry (IHAT) :

The people making these accusations have to put up or shut up. It is almost impossible to imagine that justice can be done after the amount of time that has passed. Our members are wondering about the motivation of this inquiry. Is it a sop to 'Human Rights' opinion, or is it actually aimed towards reaching a conclusion?

 [BAFF link]

And in September 2011 our spokesman was quoted in the Sunday Telegraph:

Obviously any allegations of misconduct against members of the Armed Forces need to be taken seriously and properly investigated.

Our concern is that some of the allegations being investigated by IHAT have little or no evidential basis and that even if there were indications that something had occurred, it is now far too long after the events for there to be any realistic chance of a just resolution.

What we cannot condone is a 'fishing expedition’ by IHAT in which service personnel are asked to inform on each other.

BAFF takes the view that the work of IHAT should be reviewed by an outside authority, and that if it is determined that the investigations are unlikely to result in prosecutions, IHAT should be disbanded and a line drawn under its work.

[BAFF link]

We didn't confine ourselves to comment, but set up a package of basic initial professional advice from an English law firm for any BAFF member approached by the IHAT or Northmoor investigators, even as a witness.

Speaking personally, I welcome The Telegraph's campaign on these issues, as I did in 2011. Currently we're seeing a daily round of distinguished contributors on that subject, and it is The Telegraph which  the latest being Gen David Petraeus US Army (retired), a true friend of the British military.

Again speaking personally, I don't agree with every single sentence which has been written in an effort to bolster the campaign. What gets labelled 'lawfare' isn't always a wicked campaign against British forces.

Sometimes we might be risking the suspicion that 'The lady doth protest too much.' General Petraeus, however, makes strong points which I would like to say more.

With a significant procedural motion concerning the NI Troubles Bill expected on Monday (27 April), the picture is supposedly complicated by the expected absence of the Armed Forces Minister Al Carns, who is believed to be visiting troops engaged in defensive missions against Iran in the Gulf.

His absence from a key Commons moment raises questions in some minds about:

• Ministerial ownership of the Bill
• The internal balance being struck within government
• The extent to which veterans’ concerns are shaping the final legislation

Carns became Minister for Veterans and People at the Ministry of Defence on 9 July 2024, shortly after being elected as the Labour MP for Birmingham Selly Oak in the 2024 General Election, and was appointed Minister for the Armed Forces in September 2025.

As an MoD minister, Carns would not in any event be expected to lead for the Government in Commons proceedings on a Northern Ireland Office Bill, though his presence on the front bench might have carried some political weight given his role as the Government’s principal veterans-facing minister.

Al Carns was alleged to have 'been on resignation watch' for much of last year over the decision to replace the 2023 legislation. He is also said to have been closely involved in the drafting of the new protections which have yet to be published. According to The Times,

Many veterans believe he remains ambivalent about the overall plans and has stopped short of endorsing them. He has previously described protecting veterans as his “red line.

As one would hope given his Royal Marines and SBS background and his roles to date in government, Carns is said to have been one of the most prominent voices within government on the impact of legacy processes on veterans, and the need for stronger safeguards against repeated or unjustified investigation.

Ultimately, as long as he remains in government Al Carns must - and surely does - accept collective responsibility for the outcome of this saga.

The very fact that he is a veteran and yes, a rather distinguished ex senior officer, means that there has been criticism on social media of his role in what some have seen as 'letting down the veteran community'.

Other service-veteran MPs have been subjected to similar criticism over their perceived stance on this legislation based, in at least one case to our knowledge, on misinformation and a profound misunderstanding of the process which, to be fair, has been no means straightforward.

We can only hope that Monday's Commons business will generate a little more light then heat.

See also: Continuing troubles with the 'Troubles Bill' (April 2026)

The saga of Northern Ireland Troubles legislation continues in Parliament on Monday (27 April), following a statement by the NI Secretary Hilary Benn last week.

Mr Benn's written statement confirmed that the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill remains central to the Government’s approach, describing it as an effort to finally address a long-standing failure to deal with the past. Nearly three decades after the Good Friday Agreement, successive attempts'in London and in Belfast' had not delivered a system capable of commanding confidence across victims, families and former security force personnel.

The Bill would enable information sharing by the Irish Government with the Legacies Commission.

The statement went on to say that '...unlike the false promise of the 2023 Legacy Act, the Troubles Bill does not offer immunity including for those who committed heinous acts of terrorism, and will be compliant with our Human Rights obligations, has been welcomed by all the main Northern Ireland political parties and indeed by many Operation Banner veterans.'

Crucially the Bill does not provide immunity for Troubles-related offences, in contrast to the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023. The 2023 Act, passed under the Sunak government, was to establish an Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR) and introduce a controversial conditional immunity scheme for Troubles-related offences

Mr Benn's statement does not introduce new policy so much as confirming the Government's settled direction for this legislation:

• The 2023 Act is effectively being dismantled
• The replacement framework will centre on a reformed Legacy Commission
• The emphasis is on information recovery and investigation without amnesty

Alongside the statement, ministers have made clear that a substantial package of amendments is still to come.

The direction of travel is now reasonably clear, even if the full text has yet to be published. The Government is expected to focus on procedural protections for veterans, rather than any return to immunity. Likely elements include:

• Greater anonymity protections in proceedings
• Limits on compelling veterans to give evidence or be repeatedly questioned
• Measures aimed at preventing intrusive or unnecessary investigative approaches
• Additional safeguards reflecting the age and welfare of many veterans

There are also indications of further, as yet unpublished, provisions intended to provide “additional reassurance” to those who served.

In essence, the emerging model is one of no immunity, but enhanced procedural protection.

The gap: veterans’ objections

These proposed changes have not, however, resolved the core concerns raised by many veterans’ groups and individual veterans.

The principal objection is not about process, but about principle. Critics argue that:

• The Bill still allows for investigation and potential prosecution
• Procedural safeguards do little to prevent individuals being drawn into the system in the first place

From this perspective, protections are seen as assisting those already under scrutiny, rather than addressing what is viewed as the central problem: the reopening of historic cases.

A commonly articulated alternative is a much higher bar for any reinvestigation — for example, requiring credible new evidence before a case can proceed.

This concern has been voiced across parts of the veterans’ community, including organisations such as the SAS Regimental Association, which in a letter to Labour MPs has responded to Mr Benn's statement.

The SAS Regimental Association's letter has been widely reported, but for ease of access we will provide it here.

What happens next?

The Government is expected to seek a 'carry-over motion' for the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill. This allows the Bill to continue into the next parliamentary session rather than falling at the end of the current session.

The vote is expected on Monday (27 April).

While such motions are often routine, in this case it matters because:

• The Bill is controversial and incomplete
• Significant government amendments are still pending
• The Bill's survival depends on continued parliamentary support at a rather sensitive political moment

If the motion failed to pass, the current legislative effort fails and the process would have to start again.

A system still in flux

Taken together, Benn’s statement and the forthcoming parliamentary stage reinforce a broader point:

the UK’s approach to legacy investigations remains in transition.

• The old framework (2023 Act) is politically and legally discredited or anyway, abandoned
• The new framework (Troubles Bill) is still incomplete and subject to amendment
• The courts continue to shape what is legally permissible

The Government’s position is now clearer than it was—but the operational detail, and its real-world consequences, are not.

The immediate question is whether Parliament allows that system to proceed.

The more important question is whether (or how) what emerges can command confidence not only across communities in Northern Ireland, but also among those who served there.

A recent BAFF blog post mentioned that the first phase of the Renters' Rights Act 2025 is due to come into force in May 2026.

There was nothing specifically about service accommodation in the Renters' Rights Bill as first introduced by the Labour Government - or in its predecessor Bill introduced under the Conservative Government but never completed its stages before the General Election in 2024.

Sarah Gibson MP (Lib Dem, Chippenham) found cross-party support for a clause to be added to the Bill to require an annual assessment of

(a) the extent to which service family accommodation in England meets the relevant standards during that year, and 

(b)the work to maintain and improve the standard of service family accommodation in England that is undertaken during that year and planned for subsequent years.

The first report will cover the year 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2027.

This provision only covers England, but the Act also includes powers for Scottish and Welsh Ministers to make complementary provisions for their jurisdictions.

While elections are imminent in both Scotland and Wales, we trust that the necessary regulations will be adopted as soon as possible, so that assessment of service accommodation in both nations can proceed on a similar timetable to England's.

• Part 3 Renters' Rights Act 2025 - Decent Homes Standard
• The Renters' Rights Bill - Sarah Gibson MP

The Renters' Rights Act 2025 is intended to implement Labour Party manifesto commitments to 'overhaul the regulation of our country’s insecure and unjust private rented sector'. The Act only applies to England, and will be brought into force in three phases, with the first phase expected to come into force on 1 May 2026.

While the Act is intended to 'provide tangible benefits for responsible landlords' by providing simpler regulation, as its title implies the primary intention is to protect tenants.

The excellent 'Landlords' Toolkit' page on the Army Families Federation website lists the major changes under the Act, and also explains that

The Renters’ Rights Act represents a significant step forward in improving the private rented sector in England. It aims to create a fairer, more secure system for everyone who relies on private renting. The Act is designed to strengthen protections, increase transparency, and support both tenants and landlords in maintaining safe, stable homes.

However, these changes may have unintended consequences for Army families who need to let out their home when they are assigned elsewhere, especially those who have used Forces Help to Buy (FHTB) to purchase their property. With the introduction of a 12‑month notice period for regaining possession of a rental property, it may become more difficult for families to ensure their home is available when they need to return at the end of an assignment.

AFF has raised concerns to the MOD Policy Team on how the bill may impact Serving Personnel. If you are experiencing issues please do contact the housing team on: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

• Army Families Federation: Landlords Toolkit
• GOV.UK: Guide to the Renters' Rights Act

Following and evidence session with her on Wednesday (26 Mar), the House of Commons Defence Committee has recommended the Defence Secretary to proceed with the appointment of his preferred candidate for Armed Forces Commissioner, retired RAF Air Commodore Polly Miller-Perkins.

Ms Miller-Perkins is expected to take up the role on an interim basis for one year from April 2026, as a direct appointment without competition. A previous full and open recruitment process was unsuccessful in appointing a candidate. The Ministry of Defence has announced its intention to re-run that process shortly.

The MOD announcement also says that

Former RAF Air Commodore Polly Perkins served for over 30 years in the Royal Air Force, specialising in logistics and holding senior leadership roles including Deputy Commander and Chief of Staff, British Forces Cyprus. She deployed on operations in Kosovo and Afghanistan and worked with NATO partners to improve multinational logistics. She holds an MA in Defence Studies from King’s College London and was awarded a CBE for her service.

Tan Dhesi MP the Defence Committee chair rightly said that 'The success of the Armed Forces Commissioner depends on being visibly independent', but it seems in principle welcome that Ms Miller-Perkins has substantial experience of the armed forces.

The person-spec for the job did not require applicants to have served in the armed forces, but the 'desirable criteria' included 'Knowledge of the Armed Forces operating model, and the complaints procedures.'

The relevant legislation is the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025. The Interim Commissioner will take responsibility for the existing Service Complaints Ombudsman and, says the MOD, 'ensure there is no break in that service.'

We wish Ms Miller-Perkins all the best in this new appointment. BAFF should take a close interest in how this develops.

This year's Armed Forces Day national event will be hosted by Rushmoor Borough Council at Aldershot and Farnborough on Saturday, 27th June 2026, with other events taking place across the UK on or around the same date.

When Armed Forces Day was started by the then Labour government one view was that armed forces personnel were hardly honoured by giving them extra work at the weekend.

In practice, events have tended to involve a wide community effort, with considerable local authority input, and - without downplaying the preparation and time involved - forces personnel themselves being as much as possible the 'stars' rather than the 'general dogsbodies'.

We certainly wouldn't argue with the need to improve and reinforce engagement between the armed forces and the community.

Armed Forces Day in the UK started 20 years ago as 'Veterans' Day'. It was rebranded as Armed Forces Day in 2009 to better recognise all branches of the military, including serving regular and reserve personnel, veterans, and cadets. The main national event is held annually on the last Saturday in June; last year's was hosted by Ards and North Down Borough Council at Newtownards Airfield.

Armed Forces Day isn't the same one-size-fits-all event across the United Kingdom. The lead organiser can be the Council, the Legion, or a community organisation. For Armed Forces Day 2026 events in your area, visit this link:

• Armed Forces Day - Find Events

Events will continue to be added to that page until much nearer the date. We would encourage every organisation holding a bona fide Armed Forces Day event to make sure it gets added to the list, as sometimes that gets overlooked.

An MOD written parliamentary answer to James Cartlidge MP (Cons, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence) reveals that in just under 20 months, nearly sixty thousand applications to join the armed forces were rejected on medical grounds.

The answer also revealed striking disparities amongst the figures for the respective services -

Rejections per service

• Army: 45,680 rejected on medical grounds
• RAF:   12,310
• Navy:    1,020

Although not specifically stated, these figures are for regular forces. Applying them to the approximate current size of each regular force reveals a huge variation in the proportion per service of applicants rejected on medical grounds -

Rejections compared with approx service size

• Army ∼ 62% rejections as %age of current force
• RAF   ∼ 41% rejections as %age of current force
• RN/RM ∼3% rejections as %age of current force

Another way to view these figures is that the Army rejected on medical grounds around 6 applicants for every 10 serving soldiers; the RAF rejected around 4 applicants per 10 serving aviators, and the RN/RM rejected less than one applicant per 10 serving sailors or marines.

Comparing the medical rejection figures with annual targets, however, shows the Army and the RAF rejecting about the same percentage on medical grounds, with the RN/RM rjecting far fewer -

Medical rejections compared with target recruitment intake

• Army - around 2.7 rejections per target recruit
• RAF - around 2.6 rejections per target recruit
• RN/RM - around 0.2 rejections per target recruit

Differences in the Navy rejection figures could be partly explained by differences in their recruiting pipleine structure, and differences in recording.

The number of medical rejections, especially for the Army, remains a concern.

It is not difficult to understand various justifications for imposing strict medical standards for the armed forces. It is also clear that some applicants rejected on medical grounds would have failed on other grounds anyway, or not continued their applications.

Reducable medical-related processing delays have, however, lost us many potential recruits, for the reserve forces as well as the regulars.

Based on Army recruiting data 2020-2024, around half of all UK Army medical rejections arise from psychiatric history, with musculoskeletal problems accounting for roughly 11–15%.

All other causes—such as asthma, eyesight problems or neurological conditions—each represent only small single-digit percentages of disqualifications.

(As a sidenote, the statistics for medical discharge of serving personnel reverse that pattern, with musculoskeletal first and mental health second.)

The importance of baseline mental health in the military profession is obvious. But increased awareness of mental health in society has meant that compared to the past, many more potential recruits now have mental health incidents in their medical record, perhaps from adolescence.

Modest but welcome adjustments were therefore made in 2024 with an update to Joint Service Publication (JSP) 950 Leaflet 6-7-7, which outlines the medical entry standard for the Armed Forces; up-to-date copies can be found online.

For example, a history of depression does not automatically disqualify candidates if they have recovered and meet stability criteria. The rules for Autism spectrum conditions and ADHD have also been adjusted but not removed.

The Government proposes, in the Armed Forces Bill currently before Parliament, to establish a new standalone corporate body to be called the Defence Housing Service.

According to the Ministry of Defence, the purpose is

to renew tens of thousands of military homes and address years of underinvestment as government vows to renew the nation’s contract with those who serve by delivering better housing, services and boosting protections for those who serve.

According to the Bill as submitted, the primary functions of the Defence Housing Service would be:

• improving the supply and quality of defence housing,
• managing land or other property used (or formerly used) for defence purposes,
• securing the regeneration or development of such land or other property, and
• supporting in other ways—
  • the creation, regeneration or development of service communities, and
  • the continued wellbeing of those communities.

Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC) held this week a webinar exploring opportunities for service leavers and veterans in armed policing.

Over 30 people joined the webinar and heard from serving Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) about transferable skills, their relocation journey, and how they had integrated into the local community.

The webinar covered the role of the CT-AFO, the Civil Nuclear Constabulary’s mission, the Code of Ethics, and offered insights into the recruitment process and specialisms that the CNC offer.

The CNC has over 1,110 Authorised Firearms Officers covering various sites.

The webinar was held in conjunction with British Forces Resettlement Services (BFRS), which was established in 2009 to provide a bridge between the Armed Forces Community and employers and training providers, to ensure the AFC and their families receive the right support, guidance, and opportunities in their transition from military service.

At their 'Military to Civilian Events' like this recent webinar, BFRS offer the Armed Forces Community the chance to meet employers, find jobs, access self-employment opportunities, enrol in training schemes and get in touch with a whole raft of support services specialising in the transition from Military to Civilian life.

• CNC Jobs
• British Forces Resettlement Services (BFRS) - forthcoming events

The Labour Party's 2024 General Election manifesto included a commitment to "strengthen support for our Armed Forces communities by putting the Armed Forces Covenant fully into law", and in June 2025 following a Defence Committee report on the Armed Forces Covenant, the Government committed to extending the Covenant’s Legal Duty to all UK Government departments and the devolved administrations.

Specifically, the Armed Forces Bill now before Parliament would extend the Covenant Legal Duty to cover all UK Government Departments, all Devolved Governments (Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), and the following wide policy areas:

• Housing
• Education
• Healthcare
• Social care
• Childcare
• Employment and service in the armed forces
• Personal taxation
• Welfare benefits
• Criminal justice
• Immigration
• Citizenship
• Pensions
• Service-related compensation
• Transport

The Royal British Legion (RBL) is calling on service personnel and veterans of the Iraq War (Op Telic 2003-2011) to come forward and register for an event at the National Memorial Arboretum commemorating 15 years since the official end of the conflict.

Details from the RBL:

The event, on 22nd May, will pay tribute to those who served in the Iraq War and recognise and honour the 179 British Armed Forces personnel who lost their lives, the 6,000 who were injured, and their families, and the bereaved.

British Armed Forces joined the US-led Coalition in Iraq, named Operation TELIC, in March 2003. In the years that followed until its conclusion in May 2011, violence escalated as a growing insurgency developed into sectarian conflict. British personnel, alongside Coalition partners and Iraqi colleagues, faced constant threats including roadside bombs, snipers and rocket attacks, both on patrol and in barracks.

• The National Memorial Arboretum, Alrewas, Staffordshire

The Ministry of Defence has announced that for the first time, free, independent legal advice will be available to victim-survivors of rape and sexual offences (allegedly) committed by Service personnel or a civilian subject to Service Discipline that are being investigated by the Service Justice System.

The Independent Legal Advocacy (ILA) support programme pilot will, from Spring 2026, provide impartial legal support to any such victim-survivors aged 18 or over, irrespective of whether they themselves are Service personnel or civilians.

Veterans & People Minister Louise Sandher-Jones said that anyone who reports a sexual offence or rape allegedly committed by a service person, or civilians subject to Service Law, and is being investigated by the Service Justice System, will qualify for support.

She told BFBS Forces News: "At the moment as a victim the kind of support that you will access through the military will be mostly that which focuses on pastoral. So, for example, our Victims and Witnesses Care Unit is mostly focused on pastoral support to you as a victim.

"What this independent legal advocacy system will do is provide you with free legal advice so you're able to understand the process that is in front of you, what decisions to make and have the confidence to know that what you're doing is the right thing for you."

The MOD is in the process of choosing a law firm to provide the legal advisers. The programme is set to begin in the spring and will initially run as a 12-month pilot.

Comment: The announcement follows huge concern over cases such as Gunner Jaysley-Louise Beck, the 19-year-old British Army soldier whose death by suicide in 2021 has triggered major scrutiny into the handling of sexual assault and harassment complaints within the military. It will be interesting to know what areas of expert legal advice would be covered by the scheme, but no doubt it will include help to navigate a victim's journey through the service justice system as a complainant and witness.

The need remains for any service personnel suspected of, or charged with, serious crimes to have access to expert legal advice and representation from the earliest stage of their case.