VerbatimParliament, as it happens

LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme

Asked by Sir Julian LewisConservativeMinistry of DefenceTabled Answered 13 July 2026UIN 16833

The question

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make it his policy to include within the Financial Recognition Scheme ("FRS") those veterans who resigned from the armed forces as a result of pressure to do so on account of their sexual orientation; if he will ensure that Subject Access Requests by such veterans for their Service Records will be prioritised in time to meet the FRS application deadline of 12 December 2026; and what provisions he will make for the proper consideration of applications by such veterans to the FRS whose relevant contemporary documentation has been destroyed by his Department.

Answered by Mr Calvin Bailey

The scope of the Financial Recognition Scheme (FRS) already includes those who felt pressured to resign and they are encouraged to apply for the LGBT Impact Payment. The Impact Payment is assessed by an Independent Panel, separate from and independent of Defence, and provides recognition for a broad range of impacts felt under the Ban, including experiencing pressure to resign.

Defence does not require applicants to provide service records to support their application and encourages veterans to apply with their own personal testimonies. Subject Access Requests from any individuals, not just LGBT veterans, can take time to complete, not only due to high demand but also as records are stored in multiple locations. Prioritising requests from LGBT veterans would be unfair on other veterans applying to other Defence schemes that do require such evidence.

All applications are considered on a basis of reverse burden of proof; the information provided by the applicant will be accepted if the reported events are more likely to have occurred than not, unless there is evidence on their case file to the contrary. This approach prevents applicants being disadvantaged due to records being incomplete through no fault of their own.

Verbatim has judged this answer against the question that was actually asked — answered, partly answered, or evaded. Sign in to see the verdict →

Open this question in Verbatim →

Every written question, searchable

155,000 questions tabled since the election, with the answer each department gave — and the ones still unanswered, with the clock running. Free to search.

Search written questions →Read on Verbatim