Joanna Lumley has called on the government to meet the “brave and loyal” Gurkha veterans who are currently on hunger strike opposite Downing Street over their pensions.
Protesters have been camped in Whitehall for nine days now.
According to the Support Our Gurkhas website, the hunger strikers are campaigning for equal pensions for Gurkhas who retired before 1997 and are not eligible for a full UK Armed Forces pension.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Hunger-striking ex-Gurkha: ‘I don’t care if I die’
The actress and campaigner said ministers “cannot praise our veterans to the high heavens when it suits them, but ignore them and condemn them to poverty when it doesn’t”.
Gurkhas are Nepalese-born soldiers who have been recruited into the British army since 1815, fighting most recently in Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia.
Advertisement
Ms Lumley led a successful campaign to get Gurkhas settlement rights in Britain.
The 75-year-old’s father was a major in the Gurkha Rifles and she was born in India and moved to England as a child.
More from Politics
She said: “Seeing such brave and loyal Gurkha British Army veterans feeling they have no option but to take the drastic step of entering a hunger strike will be deeply upsetting to the vast majority of the public who understand the special place that all veterans have in our hearts, in our thoughts and the life of the nation.
“Only a deep sense of injustice could drive these brave and respectful souls to this point.
“At the heart of this matter is how we value those who have offered, and sometimes given, the ultimate sacrifice to protect our way of life and to keep us safe.
“I urge the government to meet these veterans and to cut through the morass of detail surrounding the complexity of the various pension schemes and find some way to address the injustices highlighted.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Act soon or there won’t be any of us left’
But defence minister Leo Docherty said the Gurkhas had declined to meet him.
“I was disappointed the Satyagraha protest group declined to meet with me and hope they will engage positively in the Gurkha veterans dialogue the Defence Secretary hosts in early September,” he said.
“We greatly value the contribution that Gurkhas make and consider the 1948 Gurkha Pension Scheme to be objectively fair and equitable, but I am always willing to speak with veterans and help resolve any such welfare concerns.”
Sky News has asked the Ministry of Defence for clarification on when the offer of a meeting was declined.
Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told Sky News on Friday that he was happy to meet the Gurkhas.
But in a sign that the government will not meet the demands of the protesters, he added that no government “of any colour” had made retrospective changes to pensions similar to the ones the Gurkhas are calling for.
“I am very happy to meet any Gurkha. My father fought alongside the Gurkhas in Malaya in the 1950s, it is a pretty remarkable group of people,” the defence secretary told Kay Burley.
“The group of people currently protesting are groups affected by the change by the Labour government in 1997 to 2003.
“This was about people who are under a 1947 pension, it is a very small group of Gurkha pensioners, they had different advantages in their pension scheme in that old scheme.
“That scheme said that you got it after 15 years when a British soldier got it after 22, but there is a difference and they feel that difference needs to be made up.
“That is not the same as the Gurkhas of today or the Gurkhas after 2003, they get exactly the same pensions as British serving personnel, but of course no government of any colour, Labour or Conservative, or coalition, has ever retrospectively changed pensions, that has not been the case.”
Gurkhas who served from 1948 to 2007 were members of the Gurkha Pension Scheme (GPS).
Image: The defence secretary Ben Wallace has said he is happy to meet the Gurkhas
This was closed in 2007 and all serving Gurkhas or those who retired after 1 July 1997 were given the option of transferring to the Armed Forces Pension Scheme (AFPS).
The date 1 July 1997 is when the Gurkhas became based in the UK and no longer classified as a Far East-based force.
Under the GPS, Gurkhas qualify for an immediate pension after 15 years of service, while for armed forces as a whole it is 22 years.
This can mean some Gurkhas will have been receiving pension payments for more than 20 years before many British soldiers of the same rank and length of service qualify for payments as part of the AFPS.
The GPS was based on the Indian Army model and was designed for Gurkhas retiring back to Nepal, where the cost of living is much lower than in the UK.
However, many of those Gurkhas will have taken up the right to settle in the UK following the change of policy under the Labour government in 2009.
Pensions under the GPS were increased by between 10% and 34% in 2019, while £25m was invested in medical and healthcare facilities in Nepal for Gurkha veterans.
A public consultation on the latest changes to the scheme ended in March and the government is currently considering the size of the uplift that will be applied to the pensions.
The issue has been the subject of long-running campaigning over the years.
Responding to calls for reform in 2010, Labour defence minister Kevan Jones described the GPS as “good and fair” and said the MoD’s position on the matter was “legally and morally sound and beyond reproach”.
The exclusion of Gurkhas who served before 1 July 1997 has also been challenged in the courts, with the European Court of Human Rights ruling in 2016 that the move was “objectively and reasonably justified”.
China’s plan to liquidate confiscated crypto through Hong Kong exchanges isn’t simply a policy — it’s to control global digital asset markets and outmaneuver the US.
The Online Safety Act is putting free speech at risk and needs significant adjustments, Elon Musk’s social network X has warned.
New rules that came into force last week require platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and X – as well as sites hosting pornography – to bring in measures to prove that someone using them is over the age of 18.
The Online Safety Act requires sites to protect children and to remove illegal content, but critics have said that the rules have been implemented too broadly, resulting in the censorship of legal content.
X has warned the act’s laudable intentions were “at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach”.
It said: “When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of ‘online safety’.
“It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:53
What are the new online rules?
X claims the timetable for platforms to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight – and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, “encouraging over-censorship”.
More on Online Safety Bill
Related Topics:
“A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. It’s safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK,” it said.
A UK government spokesperson said it is “demonstrably false” that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech.
“As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression,” they added.
Users have complained about age checks that require personal data to be uploaded to access sites that show pornography, and 468,000 people have already signed a petition asking for the new law to be repealed.
In response to the petition, the government said it had “no plans” to reverse the Online Safety Act.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:23
Why do people want to repeal the Online Safety Act?
Reform UK’s leader Nigel Farage likened the new rules to “state suppression of genuine free speech” and said his party would ditch the regulations.
Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday that those who wanted to overturn the act were “on the side of predators” – to which Mr Farage demanded an apology, calling Mr Kyle’s comments “absolutely disgusting”.
Regulator Ofcom said on Thursday it had launched an investigation into how four companies – that collectively run 34 pornography sites – are complying with new age-check requirements.
These companies – 8579 LLC, AVS Group Ltd, Kick Online Entertainment S.A. and Trendio Ltd – run dozens of sites, and collectively have more than nine million unique monthly UK visitors, the internet watchdog said.
The regulator said it prioritised the companies based on the risk of harm posed by the services they operated and their user numbers.
It adds to the 11 investigations already in progress into 4chan, as well as an unnamed online suicide forum, seven file-sharing services, and two adult websites.
Ofcom said it expects to make further enforcement announcements in the coming months.
Already, in the true spirit of Mr Corbyn’s politics, there is talk of an open leadership contest and grassroots participation.
Some supporters of the new party – which is being temporarily called “Your Party” while a formal name is decided by members – believe that allowing a leadership contest to take place honours Mr Corbyn’s commitment to open democracy.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:51
Jeremy Corbyn open to ideas on new party name
They point out that under Mr Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, members famously backed plans to make it easier for local constituency parties to deselect sitting MPs – a concept he strongly believed in.
His allies now say the former Labour leader, who is 76, is open to there being a leadership contest for the new party, possibly at its inaugural conference in the autumn, where names lesser known than himself can throw their hat into the ring.
“Jeremy would rather die than not have an open leadership contest,” one source familiar with the internal politics told Sky News.
More on Jeremy Corbyn
Related Topics:
However, there have been suggestions that Ms Sultana appears to be less keen on the idea of a leadership contest, and that she is more committed to the co-leadership model than her political partner.
Those who have been opposed to the co-leadership model believe it could give Ms Sultana an unfair advantage and exclude other potential candidates from standing in the future.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:18
Corbyn’s new political party isn’t ‘real deal’
One source told Sky News they believed Mr Corbyn should lead the party for two years, to get it established, before others are allowed to stand as leader.
They said Ms Sultana, who became an independent MP after she was suspended from Labour for opposing the two-child benefit cap, was “highly ambitious but completely untested as leader” and “had a lot of growing into the role to do”.
“It’s not about her – it’s about taking a democratic approach, which is what we’re supposed to be doing,” they said.
“There are so many people who have done amazing things locally and they need to have a chance to emerge as leaders.
“We are not only fishing from a pool of two people.
“It needs to be an open contest. Nobody needs to be crowned.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:22
Corbyn’s new party shakes the left
While Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana undoubtedly have the biggest profiles out of would-be leaders, advocates for a grassroots approach to the leadership point to the success some independent candidates have enjoyed at a local level – for example, 24-year-old British Palestinian Leah Mohammed, who came within 528 votes of unseating Health Secretary Wes Streeting in Ilford North.
Fiona Lali of the Revolutionary Communist Party, who stood in last year’s general election for the Stratford and Bow constituency, has also been mentioned in some circles as someone with potential leadership credentials.
However, sources close to Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana downplayed suggestions of any divide over the leadership model, pointing out that their joint statement acknowledged that members would “decide the party’s direction” at the inaugural conference in the autumn, including the model of leadership and the policies that are needed to transform society.
A spokesperson for Mr Corbyn told Sky News: “Jeremy will be working with Zarah, his independent colleagues, and people from trade unions and social movements up and down the country to make an autumn conference a reality.
“This will be the moment where people come together to launch a new democratic party that belongs to the members.”