Nick Harvey MP

Defence Debate: Armed Forces Personnel

As ever, may I start by paying tribute to the men and women of our armed forces who work tirelessly and bravely, often in difficult, demanding and dangerous circumstances.

I join others in expressing my condolences for those who have lost their lives serving their country, and my sympathy to those who have returned injured, either physically or mentally.

Our personnel are the lifeblood of our military capabilities. Yet faced with low pay, long hours, substandard accommodation, insufficient recognition and the prospect of another ten to twenty years in Afghanistan without the support they need, they do not have an easy time.

Our priority has to be to honour the 'duty of care' and ensure our forces are backed up with the resources, equipment and support they require to do their jobs.

We must be sure that an economic downturn does not water down the support to the military particularly at a time of heightened threats.

The MOD's own 'credit crunch' has already hit, with delays in the carriers and armoured vehicle. This must not be allowed to undermine our capabilities.

But we do need to look even further more at how our forces can be even more flexible, efficient and effective as a fighting force.

Yet again, I must restate the need for a new Strategic Defence Review, whose principal objective will be to assess afresh where to strike the balance between - one the one hand, aligning ourselves for the wars of today, the medium term challenges we can anticipate, and "acting as a force for good around the world"; and on the other hand, sustaining adequate capability to provide insurance that we can defend ourselves in some future state-on-state warfare.

Overstretch

As we have observed so many times before, the key problem is overstretch, which continues to have a severe impact.

The level of experienced personnel leaving the armed forces is alarming. Recruitment can only plug part of the gap, and only a 20-fold increase in a decade in levels of recruitment from Commonwealth countries has kept recruitment going.

Many leave as a result of overstretch, low pay, bad housing and the inevitable strain that too many extended periods away from home can place on personal and family life.

Perhaps at a time of economic downturn, Armed Forces recruitment will grow and readiness to leave early might diminish.

But what incentives are offered to new recruits? Those joining the lower ranks will be paid less than firemen, policemen, bus or tube drivers, and while serving long hours on the front line won't even get the minimum wage for a career serving their country and on the frontline?

It was pointed out a few months ago that traffic wardens are paid better than young soldiers, and one caller to a radio phone-in suggested we send all of them to the front line.

Too many soldiers struggle to support their families. Surely the best army in the world should not be the worst paid!

Welfare

Mental Health

Awareness of and attitudes towards mental health problems have improved, but the psychological toll of our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan mean that mental health services will be busy for years to come.

I acknowledge the progress which has been made in improving services, but much more remains to be done.

A recent study of consumption of alcohol and binge drinking in our armed forces revealed a significant increase in alcohol consumption among those who had been deployed, who feared they might be killed and who experienced hostility from civilians.

There are and always will be disturbing and difficult experiences in conflict zones, and it is important to tackle drug and alcohol issues alongside mental health.

Accommodation

We have persistently raised the issue of accommodation from these benches. The Ministry of Defence has recognised there is a problem and has a programme of improvements, but overstates this by cheerfully adding together the rent it pays to Annington Homes, the costs of routine maintenance and what it will spend on capital improvements, and likes to give the impression that the total it comes to is all being spent on improvements. At current progress, upgrades are just not happening quickly enough.

Only last year the Public Accounts Committee noted that many personnel leaving the service cited the "appalling" state of the accommodation as a factor.

Over 9,000 properties MOD homes were last year left vacant with more than a quarter of them having been left unused for between one and five years. The MoD has therefore spent millions of pounds on rent for unoccupied housing with an average annual bill of £3,600

But it is a different picture for the top brass. Although the MoD was paying rent to Annington for 648 empty homes in London, it still went out to the private rental market and paid £16.6m a year renting 1100 private properties. On just 11 private homes for service families in London, the Ministry spent £290,000 in rent, with the most expensive costing £4,200 a month.

Compensation

I welcome the doubling of the lump sum payment of the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme to £570,000 for the most seriously injured. Although it still places a limit which would not apply to civilians, it could make a huge difference to those affected and their families.

Making it retrospective also means it can help people like Paratrooper Ben Parkinson who was awarded only £152,000 despite his extensive and critical injuries.

The Government should be applauded for this.

However, there are still certain outstanding issues. The burden of proof that the injury was caused by Service still lies with the claimant. It should be returned to the Secretary of State to prove the opposite, as it was under the War Pension Scheme up till 2005.

Time limits for claimants should be abolished: the five year limit for initial claims and ten year limit for worsening conditions could lead to difficulties for those suffering conditions where symptoms may manifest themselves later in life.

Which leads us onto nuclear test veterans.

Nuclear Test Veterans

The nuclear test veterans' case is currently going through court to see if they can be given a hearing to claim compensation.

What kind of message does it send out to our current personnel when our own Government closes its ears to a group of veterans who have suffered cancers, fertility problems and skin defects as a result of exposure to nuclear bomb tests?

Some of these men and their families have fought for years, and virtually every other country has recognised and compensated their test veterans? Why does the MOD try to hide from its moral obligations behind a timing technicality?

Gurkhas

We have long campaigned long for the rights of Gurkhas.

Everyone is this House can recognise the unwavering support the Gurkhas have given our country in conflicts overseas. Military personnel I have spoken to rave, about their bravery and skill.

They have fought for a country that was not their own, and in return they have asked for little but the right for them and their families to remain here.

However, despite the Government facing up to Britain's moral duty for those serving after 1997, those predating this arbitrary date - but whose circumstances are the same - have had to go to the courts to seek justice.

Conclusions

There are other issues where progress has been made but more is needed. Help for those leaving the forces to get their foot onto the job and housing ladders. Making a practical reality of the principle of priority treatment in the NHS. Helping forces families cope with the effects of moving home regularly.

Our Armed Forces personnel play a vital role in conflict theatres, peacekeeping and humanitarian work around the world.

But if we are to maintain top level capability, we must go further in reinforcing the nation's duty of care to them. We must not allow the economic crisis to have a damaging impact on them.

Tinkering around the edges will neither solve the recruitment problem, nor make a real difference to retention.

We need a new approach to our Armed Forces, a new Strategic Defence review and assessment of the context in which they work, and a renewed commitment to delivering the care and support so urgently needed by our service personnel and their families.