LGBT veterans who suffered under ‘gay ban’ fear backslide on redress pledges

LGBT veterans who suffered historical mistreatment in the armed forces fear the new Labour Government will not live up to promises of restitution.

In opposition, Labour promised to fulfil calls for a parliamentary debate on reparations for armed forces personnel who suffered mistreatment before the so-called “gay ban” was lifted in 2000.

It also appeared willing to reconsider the £50 million cap on a compensation scheme which was set in motion by the Tories in government, according to the charity Fighting With Pride.

But there are now fears Labour could breach these promises, according to the group’s campaign director Craig Jones, a former Royal Navy officer.

Survivors of the scandal suffered days of sometimes brutal interrogation when it was discovered they were gay; many were dismissed from the forces, lost out on job opportunities and were shunned by families and friends.

An independent review into the historical mistreatment of LGBT veterans concluded last year, and followed a string of high profile inquiries into the Grenfell Tower fire, and the infected blood and Post Office Horizon scandals where compensation packages were also promised.

Mr Jones claimed the LGBT veterans were a “poor relation” to the victims of these other scandals, and deserved the same level of public awareness and remuneration.

Speaking to the PA news agency, he said: “My principal concern at the moment is that there has been a wind change in Labour since they came to power, and… they seem determined to not deliver in government the promises that they made in opposition.”

Fighting with Pride – which was set up to advocate for those who suffered under the ban – wants to work with the Government on the detail of the compensation scheme, but Mr Jones said ministers had stopped communicating their plans with the charity.

Mr Jones also warned the £50 million overall cap on payments could leave some mistreated veterans with a “derisory” amount of compensation.

The charity estimates some 2,500 veterans would apply for the scheme, numbers it claims are likely more accurate than the Government’s figure of 4,000 people.

By the official estimate, the current capped scheme would provide those caught up in the scandal with one-off payments of £12,500 on average, an amount MPs have previously raised concerns about in the Commons.

A six-figure sum would look more like restitution for the “people who have lost so much” due to the scandal, according to Mr Jones, though not all those eligible for compensation would require this.

The money would help them out of expensive rented accommodation, give them “sufficient income” in their old age, and even help some with no savings to pay for their funerals.

Mr Jones added: “The payments that they intend for LGBT plus veterans are of a totally different and lower magnitude to Horizon, and tainted blood, and Grenfell.

“There are four schemes that are being monitored by the National Audit Office. We are one of them, but we are by a long way the poor relations, in fact, by a factor of at least 10.

“But the circumstances when compared, particularly to Horizon, are incredibly similar. People lost their careers, their homes, they were vilified in their communities, they served prison sentences, and they’ve lived their lives amidst the ashes of the lives that they had before.

“I don’t want to be competitive with Horizon, but this began for some of our people in the late 1960s.”

Following the conclusion of the investigation into the scandal in 2023, then-prime minister Rishi Sunak issued a public apology in the House of Commons.

Ben Wallace, then defence secretary, said there would be a parliamentary debate on financial redress for the veterans so MPs could scrutinise the plans, but this did not materialise as planned.

Labour Defence Secretary John Healey held a “number of conversations” with the charity while in opposition, Mr Jones said, including on holding the debate.

He added: “At the time, he was extremely supportive and ridiculed the then-Conservative government’s plans for compensation to LGBT plus veterans.

“It is incredibly disappointing that he has not made time to meet with Fighting with Pride during his tenure as Secretary of State, and it is particularly disappointing that from what we can see, the Labour Government intends to persist with plans that in private they told us were unacceptable to them.”

A Ministry of Defence official is said to have signalled during a recent meeting of more than 100 veterans hosted by Fighting With Pride that a parliamentary debate on financial redress is not likely to go ahead before the compensation scheme is rolled out.

“They are therefore, in our view, deliberately avoiding parliamentary scrutiny at the point of delivering the scheme,” Mr Jones said.

He added: “Given that the Secretary of State, John Healey, on December 12, gave his predecessor a hard time on this exact same subject, it’s a bit rich.

“It’s a breach of a promise, and this scheme should go no further until Parliament has had the opportunity to offer opinion.”

The campaigner continued: “If we have values as a nation, if we support our armed forces, if we believe in the covenant, the nation’s promise to our armed forces, then there needs to be a watershed moment for LGBT veterans, after which we can look back and say bad things were done in their time, but eventually we did the right thing.”

A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “We deeply regret the treatment of LGBT serving personnel between 1967 and 2000, which was wholly unacceptable and does not reflect today’s Armed Forces. We are fully committed to ensuring this issue receives parliamentary scrutiny.

“We have already implemented 32 of the 49 recommendations from the LGBT veterans review and we are working with experts across Government to establish an appropriate financial redress scheme and will provide more details later this year.”