| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Dr. Moonie: Strictly speaking, they are not recognised by the War Pensions Agency as suffering from it. I would have hoped that once somebody has clearly demonstrated such symptoms, the case could be reviewed, which, of course, is always an option. Again, I would hope that the better dissemination of advice that we are trying to carry out through the veterans initiative ought to make people more aware of the benefits to which they are entitled. I cannot praise Combat Stress enough. It has done a wonderful job under often very
difficult circumstances. I am glad that we can provide it with a certain amount of support, and I hope that that will continue and grow if needs are seen to grow with it, as we could not do without that organisation.I am conscious of the time remaining, and I must not continue at too much length. Generally, however, we have taken account of the changes in practice from the past, and even from the first Gulf war conflict. We try to manage things preventively. Psychiatric services within the military offer briefings to service personnel at all levels of their training and to junior and senior executive commanders. It is planned that most stress management work should be carried out by an individual's own commander and not by medical personnel, the aim being to try to demedicalise an individual's reaction to a traumatic event. Individuals are encouraged to self-help within their natural peer group. Briefings have been provided to people on Operation Telic before, during and after their deployments. Only time will tell how effective that is. The great problem with post-traumatic stress, as anybody who has worked on it knows, is that we cannot predict who will get it. If we could do so, it would be a darned sight easier to manage.
Following the lessons that have been learned, as Members are probably aware, I have instituted a study through the King's college group in London under Professor Wesley, which will look prospectively at the health of a sample of those returning from the Gulf this time, to try to give us definitive information on how health experience develops over time. The sample will be large enough to provide us with accurate information on the health of the group as a whole. Clearly, it is not realistic to conduct work of that depth on everyone who was deployed, but we will make sure that the sample is large enough for reasonable conclusions to be drawn. I cannot say how long it will take for that work to be completed—that is the behest of those who are carrying out the research for us—but it will take as long as is necessary. It is, in fact, open-ended, and I do not anticipate that it will stop until I am quite certain that there are no health problems about which we should be concerned. However, I assure Members that I shall publish work when it is appropriate to do so—in other words, when it is of value and when there is something concrete that I can do.
In the limited time left, may I try to deal with the many other points that were made? Many Members mentioned the role of employers and the fear of reservists, which is an important point. Frankly, if any reservist thinks that being a reservist in the British armed forces does not involve full-time service, I do not know what planet they are living on. We have made it clear over the past couple of years that we expect reservists to serve. They will be called up compulsorily when their services are needed. To digress briefly, I agree with everything that was said about manpower. It would be lovely to have full manpower in our armed forces, but we are short on advice on how to achieve that—
Dr. Moonie: I have only a limited time left, but the hon. Gentleman's experience in his regiment provided us with some advice on manpower.
Patrick Mercer: That advice has never been sought.
Dr. Moonie: I promise to look at that, as I have responsibility for all personnel and recruitment matters, along with all the other things that I look after.
Overstretch is a problem in specific units, rather than the forces overall, although up to 59 per cent. of the Army has recently been deployed on active service. Clearly, that cannot be sustained in the long term. We are trying to rotate personnel, and have a roulement system in which we rotate all personnel who have been serving. I shall take up the case of the dentist raised by the hon. Member for Aldershot. We have been trying to prevent individuals from serving for such a long time, but we have used reserves to spare our regulars from deployment, as many of them will be redeployed if they have to go back. That was one of the reasons for the alteration.
The point about people sitting around doing nothing is well taken. We have to deploy enough people to cover our needs in case there is a lot of work to be done. The fact that we had mercifully few casualties, even taking into account the fact that we had to deal with civilians and Iraqi soldiers as well as our own casualties, is something to be grateful for. However, lack of work is of great concern to our medical people. Nobody with considerable skills likes to be left sitting around doing nothing and watching their skills degrade. We will have to pay close attention to that.
I shall make one or two general points. I shall look in detail at the point about Senegal made by my hon. Friend the Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) along with colleagues from the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development, and get back to him. On numbers, we have made no plans, and I have seen nothing. I can say hand on heart that I have seen nothing whatsoever in the MOD to suggest that we are about to cut regiments. That does not mean that regiments will not be cut and roles will not be changed—no Minister could make any such promise to the House. That has not happened in the past, and I am not going to do it tonight. However, no such suggestions have been made to us. Capabilities change, configurations of forces must change, and the numbers and expertise of our personnel have to change with them. That is not done by faceless bureaucrats, as the hon. Member for Newark (Patrick Mercer) unkindly suggested, but by uniformed senior personnel. It is always the MOD in general which is blamed for things. However, a bunch of Ministers have not decided to sit down and be as sod-like as possible to the armed forces. In fact, the armed forces themselves decided what capabilities they needed to fulfil the commitments that we asked them to make.
I have not covered nearly enough. On housing targets, I accept the problem. We are making improvements. On accommodation, when I tell soldiers that I will improve their accommodation and they are living rent free, they whine. They quite like roughing it, living rent free and spending their money on something else—not all of them, I may add, but a substantial minority.
My hon. Friend the Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Tony Worthington) made some interesting points, about which I shall write to him, as I do not have
time to deal with them now. The points about logistics are well taken. There were individual instances in which supplies did not come up to the mark—It being Six o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
ESTIMATES
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 145 (Liaison Committee),
- That this House agrees with the report [10th June] of the Liaison Committee.—[Jim Fitzpatrick.]
PETITIONS
Park Road Branch Post Office
6 pm
Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye): I present the petition of Mr. William Burkitt and 400 other of my constituents living in the Park Road area of Hastings. I wholly support the petition, which calls on the Post Office to withdraw its proposals to close the Park Road branch post office, which would cause undue distress to many, particularly elderly, people living in the area. The petition
- Declares that the proposed closure of Park Road Branch Post Office, Hastings, will cause difficulties to elderly and disabled residents and that the alternatives proposed by the Post Office are not acceptable.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Post Office to reconsider such proposals and allow the Park Road branch to continue providing a service to the community.
And the Petitioners remain, &c.
RAF Northolt
6.1 pm
Mr. Gareth Thomas (Harrow, West): On behalf of almost 1,000 of my constituents, I present a petition opposing any further expansion in the use by commercial air traffic of RAF Northolt, which neighbours my constituency. My constituents are concerned that the possible increase
- in the current level of air traffic accruing from the shared military and commercial use of RAF Northolt would have adverse environmental consequences and social costs, namely noise and atmospheric pollution, as well as a considerable further reduction in the amenity of the local people.
- not to allow any further significant increase in the number of flights departing or landing at RAF Northolt.
Immigration Rules
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Ainger.]
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |