Written statement: Ajax - Jan 22

Minister of State (Luke Pollard): I am releasing this statement to the House today to provide an update to Parliament on the British Army's Armoured Cavalry Programme (commonly known as Ajax).

The problems with Ajax are a matter of public record under the last government. Given the programme's troubled history, prior to granting Initial Operating Capability, I requested written assurances by senior Ministry of Defence personnel and was told Ajax was “demonstrably safe.” Despite this guarantee, on 22 November 2025, 35 Service Personnel – operating across 23 vehicles – reported symptoms resembling those caused by noise and vibration symptoms during a training exercise.

I reported to the House on 26 November 2025 that I had directed an immediate and indefinite pause of the use of Ajax for training, while safety investigations were carried out.

Concerning the welfare of the personnel involved with the November exercise. I can confirm that 25 of the 35 personnel involved have returned to duty. Two were found to be suffering from symptoms unrelated to Ajax. And the remaining eight, continue to be monitored – and we will ensure they receive necessary support. In the second separate incident, reported to this House on 18 December, involving one soldier who reported symptoms resembling those caused by vibration during testing and which compelled me to direct a pause on all Ajax trials and testing, I can confirm that this soldier has also since returned to duty with no issues.

Members of our Armed Forces voluntarily place themselves in harm's way to keep the rest of us safe. It is therefore wholly unacceptable for them to be exposed to avoidable risk.

Following the incident of 22 November, I commissioned a number of critical pieces of work and will update today on the progress and findings made so far.

Findings from the Defence Accident Investigation Branch triage report stated, “The incident response was swift, reducing further risk to personnel” and “…well-coordinated response, including immediate casualty checks, medical support, and efficient transport, demonstrated good practice and was not considered a factor in the accident.” It is clear that soldiers still suffered symptoms resembling those of noise and vibration during the exercise and we need to find out why from our further investigations.

As well as the Defence Accident Investigation Branch, the Army safety investigation is ongoing – I am expecting initial findings soon. In addition to these two safety investigations, I set out my intent to put in place a panel of experts with experience of noise and vibration to bring knowledge and challenge to this work. That panel consists of a range of expertise: academia, maritime, aviation, science and medical and will also inform on human factors. I will provide an update in due course when I am in receipt of their findings.

Separately I commissioned a Ministerial review to examine the quality of advice that Ministers, senior officials and military leadership across the MoD received. This determined that departmental submissions were accurate in declaring Ajax as safe to operate. However, it also found Ministers should have been briefed more comprehensively in relation to operational impact and the nuanced risks of operating safely. Importantly, submissions did not reflect the full breadth of known aggregated safety risk, particularly regarding vibration related injuries and historical programme issues.

To say that I am angry about the findings of the Ministerial review is an understatement. It demonstrates that people were raising issues with this programme, but they were not being elevated to an appropriate level.

Ministers rely on accurate, timely and complete information to make decisions in the national interest. When that information does not meet this standard, the consequences are not abstract. They can be real, human and serious. And I experienced this first hand with a visit to the Field Army last week where I met troops who have operated the Ajax vehicles.

In this case, inaccurate information directly contributed to the decision to declare initial operating capability for Ajax. This is unacceptable, and today I have written formally to the wider Department to explain how I expect people to be accurate, innovative and challenge unnecessary process and bureaucracy, whilst maintaining our peoples' safety. I have asked the Permanent Secretary to follow up on the key themes of this report.

This House will understand I will not comment on individual HR matters, but I can update the House that the Senior Responsible Owner of the Ajax programme is no longer in that role. An interim Senior Responsible Owner has been appointed by the Army, and I have passed oversight of this programme to the National Armaments Director, who will update me regularly.

Whilst it is important to continue these investigations at pace, we will need to decide on the platform's future shortly, and that is being considered as part of the forthcoming Defence Investment Plan.

I have taken the decision today to pause the declaration of Initial Operating Capability for this programme. Until we can confirm resolution of the concerns following the recent Titan Storm training exercise, we cannot declare that it meets the minimum requirement for use under the Initial Operating Capability model. We will continue to work hard with General Dynamics to identify problems and solutions to ensure we deliver world beating capability to our war fighters. To support this approach, we will restart the use of Ajax in trials and testing to ensure we are best placed to decide Ajax's future.

The world is changing – and UK Defence is changing with it.

Our Government is increasing defence spending and moving decisively to war-fighting readiness.

And if our war fighters are to be ready to fight and win, they must have the right equipment, delivered at pace, with safety managed appropriately.

My vision is for UK Defence to be creative, innovative and bold.

For my part, I will scrap rules that serve no purpose, cut through needless bureaucracy and trust our people to get the job done.

But let there be no misunderstanding: the safety of our people remains paramount.

That is the standard our Armed Forces deserve.

And it is the standard our Government will uphold.