LEGACY
ISSUES FOR
THE ARMED
FORCES PENSION
SCHEME
It has been the long-standing policy of successive
Governments that discretionary changes to improve the benefits
from public service pensions schemes should be implemented from
a current date for future service only. Improvements to pension
schemes are not applied retrospectively as to do otherwise would
make any worthwhile improvements unaffordable. When scheme modifications
are introduced on this basis, active members of the scheme may
be given an opportunity to pay for the new benefit to apply to
their accrued service, but pensioners and deferred pensioners
should receive only those benefits which they earned when they
were themselves active members. It would not be possible to make
an exception for former Service personnel, as this would require
a change for all public service schemes. Such a move would be
at great public expense and has been judged unaffordable by successive
Governments.
Effects of public sector pay restraint
The Department is aware of the strength of feeling
among ex-Service personnel who retired and whose pension has been
affected by the pay restraint policies in force at the time of
retirement. The effect of past public sector pay restraint policies
is more visible in respect of the Armed Forces because pensions
are based on representative rates rather than the individual's
actual earnings. These rates are published each year, which make
comparisons easy. Nonetheless, this is not a problem unique to
the Armed forces, as public service pay restraint affected other
groups also, eg police, fire fighters, civil servants, doctors
and nurses. The fluctuations caused by prevailing economic conditions
can also affect those with private pension provision. There is
no case for Service personnel to be treated differently from other
public service employees. It would be very expensive to take retrospective
action for all public service employees, besides the difficulty
of defining "pensions troughs", and successive Governments
have considered it unaffordable to do so. Such a measure would
also be seen as unfair by those pensioners who worked for private
companies but suffered similar effects.
Pre-1975 pension entitlement
The Department is also aware of the concerns
of those Armed Forces pensioners who left service before 1 April
1975 and have no pension entitlements. As the Committee will be
aware, prior to April 1975 there was no legal requirement for
any pension scheme to preserve pension rights for those who left
service before reaching the normal retirement age. This position
is not therefore unique to the Armed Forces. In the past, a pension
was regarded as a reward for long service from the employer rather
than a "right" as it is today. The Armed Forces only
required other ranks to complete 22 years reckonable service (or
16 years reckonable service for officers) in order to qualify
for an immediate pension around the age of 40. This was much earlier
than most other schemes at that time. Commissions or engagements
for shorter periods were on non-pensionable terms, but those who
had served 12 years (or nine years in the case of officers) were
awarded a gratuity, which was considerably more generous than
most employers at that time. From April 1975, in accordance with
the Social Security Act 1973, the Armed Forces Pension Scheme
awarded preserved pensions to those who did not serve up until
the Immediate Pension Point. However, this change was not retrospective
for the reasons set out in paragraph 34 above. The Committee may
be aware that a group of ex-Service personnel, called the Armed
Forces Pension Action Group, have issued court proceedings against
the Department, and the Department is responding as appropriate.
HISTORIC ANOMALIES
IN THE
PAYMENT OF
WIDOW (ER)S'
AFPS PENSIONS
There are three main AFPS widow(er)'s legacy
issues for the ex-Service and widow's organisations and for individual
pensioners. The issues all have lack of retrospection as a common
theme.
AFPS—attributable widows' and widowers'
pensions for life
The Department introduced a new policy with
effect from 31 October 2000 to allow attributable widow(er)s'
pensions to be paid to widows' and widowers' for life, regardless
of remarriage or cohabitation. This change was made in recognition
of the fact that many attributable widows will be young and have
children. However, this improvement did not apply to those who
had already remarried or co-habited before changes to the regulations
were made. This group were excluded, as they had made their decision
to remarry in the full knowledge of the financial consequences.
The principle of no-retrospection was maintained
in so far as those who had already remarried did not benefit from
this change unless they became widowed again, or became divorced
or ceased co-habiting. However, it was agreed that those widow(er)s
who had not remarried at the time of the change would be able
to retain their pensions on re-marriage or co-habitation in spite
of the fact that their pensions had come into payment before the
change was made. The case was regarded by Ministers as exceptional.
This change did not affect those in receipt
of non-attributable widow(er)s pensions. The AFPS review has proposed
extending "pensions for life" to non-attributable pensions
under the new AFPS. This change would not benefit members of the
current AFPS who choose not to transfer to the new scheme or existing
non-attributable widows or widowers. No retrospection is proposed.
The cost of extending any change is a major
factor. To have done so on this issue would have been extremely
costly and would have meant that we would have been unable to
focus on improving the position for the most deserving cases.
The broad actuarial cost of extending this provision
to the AFPS and the public service schemes is set out below:
| Scheme | Future Costs
| Retrospective Costs |
| AFPS—All widows (post-retirement widows not included—already half rate)
| £16m pa | £0.5bn
|
| AFPS—Non attributable widows | £8m pa
| £0.5bn |
| AFPS—Attributable widows | £2m pa
| £40m |
| Public Service Schemes—All widows |
£150m pa | £1.5b past service current
members, £3b incl current
pensioners + deferred
pensioners
|
The above figures have been estimated by the Government Actuary's
Department and are intended to give a broad feel for the potential
costs involved. In practice, the retrospective cost elements would
depend heavily on the level of retrospection granted (for example,
whether or not previously ceased pensions would be reinstated
and whether back pensions were paid). The public service schemes
include those for civil servants, teachers, NHS and local government
employees. However, any additional, potential costs for state
scheme benefits have been excluded.
AFPS—post-retirement widow and widower pensions (PRWP)
Service personnel are treated the same as public sector employees
on this issue. Post-retirement widow and widower pensions (PRWP)
are given to those Servicemen with service on or after 6 April
1978 and Servicewomen with service on or after 6 April 1989. Those
Service personnel who left before the qualifying date and who
married after leaving the Armed Forces have no entitlement to
widows' benefits. Personnel who left shortly after the qualifying
dates have an entitlement, but the PRWPs are low in value, as
benefits only accrued from the date of introduction. The Department
has not extended this improvement, applying the no-retrospection
policy. The cost of extending PRWP entitlement to all current
and deferred AFPS pensioners is estimated to be in the order of
£50 million. To extend the PRWP concession to survivors of
members of all public service occupational schemes would cost
between £300 and £500 million.
In January 2002 the European Court of Human Rights ruled
on a challenge by a number of retired officers on the PRWP issue.
The retired officers' complaint was that the calculation under
the AFPS of their widows' pension entitlements in the event of
their deaths, based as it is upon the date of marriage or the
date of retirement, was arbitrary and discriminatory. The Court
ruled the challenge inadmissible, as the retired officers could
not be victims because they received their entitlements under
the rules in force at the time they retired, and the 1978 rule
changes did not alter their entitlements. This ECHR ruling provides
all public sector schemes with a clear conclusion on this issue.
AFPS—uprating widows' pensions to half rate of spouses
Until 1973, the widow of a retired Serviceman, irrespective
of rank, was entitled to a pension equal to one-third of that
of the spouse. In 1973 a number of improvements to the AFPS were
introduced, one of which was to increase Service widows' pensions
to half the spouse's rate of pension, but this improvement applied
only to that part of the spouse's pension earned by his/her service
on or after 31 March 1973. Opportunities were, however, provided
for those already serving at that point to make direct contributions
to buy-in former service at the half rate. For those who did not
take up this option, only service given after 31 March 1973 counted
at the higher rate.
Again the retrospective uprating of pre-1973 widows' pensions
up to the half rate has not been allowed because it would breach
the no-retrospection policy. The Department does not know exactly
how many people are affected by this. However, on the basis of
a broad actuarial assumption, it is estimated that it would cost
about £25-£30 million per year to change all pre-1973
widows' pensions from third rate to half rate pensions.
The action in the European Court of Human Rights in January
2002 included a challenge on the rate of widows' pensions. Again,
the Court ruled the challenge inadmissible, as the retired officers
could not be victims because they were not entitled to the pension
conditions which they sought under the rules in force at the time
they retired: they received their entitlements and the 1973 rule
changes did not alter their entitlements.
WAR PENSIONS
SCHEME—WIDOW
(ER)S
The War Pensions Scheme has two widow(er)s issues which have
been the focus of attention from ex-Service and widow organisations.
An update of the position on each is given below.
Equalisation of war widowers' pensions
Since the Second World War, provision had been available
in the War Pensions Scheme for the award of pension to the surviving
male spouse of female personnel who died as a result of their
service with the Armed Forces. However the provision reflected
the social conditions of the time when the husband was usually
the breadwinner. Consequently, a widower had to satisfy more stringent
entitlement conditions than a widow in similar circumstances,
including the application of means-testing. This resulted in very
few awards being made and some of those were paid at reduced rates
because income was taken into account. This was in contrast with
war widows' pensions where the only condition to be fulfilled
was that death of the Serviceman had to be due to or hastened
by service.
This provision left the War Pensions Scheme susceptible to
challenge under Human Rights Legislation that came into force
from October 2000, because it did not provide equal treatment
for the same circumstances. The Royal British Legion has also
made representations for change. Earlier this year a change was
therefore made to the war pensions legislation to align the provisions
for war widowers with those available to war widows. The change
applies from 8 April 2002 onwards and provides that, from this
date, war widowers are entitled to the same basic pension, supplementary
pension and allowances that historically have been available to
war widows. In particular the means-testing element previously
applied to war widowers' claims and pensions has been removed.
The six existing awards of war widower's pension were automatically
reviewed to bring them in line with the new measures. This review
was effective from the date of the change in the law, ie 8 April
2002. Additionally, widowers who had previously had a claim rejected
under the old rules (ie prior to 8 April 2002) are able to make
a new claim under the new provisions. Take up of the new provisions
has been less than anticipated with 20 awards in payment at present.
The new provisions can only apply from the date of the change
in law. No payments are to be made retrospectively.
Rank differentials in war widow(er)s' pensions
In June 2002, the Minister for Veterans announced at the
Central Advisory Committee on War Pensions, a change in rank differentials
in the awards of war widow(er)s' pensions. Subject to the necessary
amending legislation, the change will take effect from April 2003
and will enable war pensions paid to widows and widowers of privates
and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) to be paid at a standard
rate, that currently appropriate for widows and widowers of NCOs.
This change benefits the majority of war widow(er)s as, of the
49,000 or so war widow(er)s pensions currently in payment, over
26,000 are paid at private rate. With the NCO rate forming the
next largest group (over 15,000) this will mean that, from April
2003, 84 per cent of all war widow(er)s will be paid at the same
rate. Costs are estimated at £0.5 million a year.
The law currently provides a standard pension rate for the
widow(er)s of men and women who held the rank of private and equivalent,
a slightly higher rate for the widow(er)s of all NCOs and then
individual rates for eleven officer groupings with some variations
for First World War (WW1) widow(er)s. Representations for the
change were put forward by the War Widows Association at the October
2001 meeting of the Central Advisory Committee. Although their
preference was for all claims to be standardised at one rate,
they were particularly concerned about the 30p a week difference
between widow(er)s of spouses from the lower ranks.
Since the announcement in June, the War Widows Association
has again raised the question of standardising all war widow(er)s
rates. However, any further changes are likely to be at prohibitive
cost and/or would involve reduction in pension for widows in the
higher ranks. For example, the War Widows Association has expressed
the view that all war widow(er)s rates should be standardised
at the rate currently appropriate to the widow(er) of a major.
This would involve an increase in pension for some 48,000 widow(er)s
(97 per cent of total) ranked below major at a cost of around
£5 million a year, while at the same time incurring a reduction
in pension for 470 higher-ranking widow(er)s. Minister confirmed
to the War Widows Association that there are no plans to introduce
such an adjustment.
CURRENT ACTIVITY
RELATING TO
GULF VETERANS'
ILLNESSES
In January 2002, a memorandum[1]was
prepared for the HCDC Chairman. It described then current activity
relating to Gulf veterans' illnesses (GVI). This paper sets out
progress since January. Like previous memoranda, the format follows
that of the July 1997 policy statement: "Gulf Veterans' Illnesses:
A New Beginning".
Openness and dialogue
DIALOGUE WITH
VETERANS
In January, officials from MOD's Gulf Veterans' Illnesses
Unit (GVIU) met solicitors and others representing Gulf veterans
to discuss the Gulf Veterans' Medical Assessment Programme (GVMAP)
and rehabilitation. GVIU staff attended meetings of the Royal
British Legion's Inter-Parliamentary Gulf War Group in March,
July and December 2002. Veterans' representatives sit on the Depleted
Uranium Oversight Board, which has met five times in 2002 and
the Independent Panel overseeing MOD's Vaccines Interactions research,
which last met in September 2002. A helpline continues to be available.
All veterans' letters and telephone calls continue to receive
comprehensive replies.
NEWSLETTER
The GVI newsletter, Gulf Update, was published in January
and November 2002. Around 400 copies of each issue were distributed.
It is also on the MOD's internet site.
INTERNET WEBSITE
The GVI website (about 120 web pages) was reviewed and updated
in October to make it more "user friendly". An email
feedback facility, direct to GVIU, was included.
INTERNATIONAL LIAISON
GVIU continues to have a full time Liaison Officer based
in Washington DC, working with US Department of Defence (DoD)
and the US Department for Veterans Affairs (VA). Both directly
and through the liaison officer, the MOD maintains close links
with the relevant US authorities. The Minister for Veterans Affairs
visited the DoD and VA in May 2002, and the Head of GVIU visited
staff from both departments in October 2002. GVIU officials have
met their counterparts from Australia in August and December.
We continue to monitor GVI activity in other countries.
Medical help
GULF VETERANS'
MEDICAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAMME (GVMAP)
As at 28 November 2002, the GVMAP had seen 3,347 patients.
The service targets of offering an appointment within five days
of receiving a referral and seeing patients within six weeks continue
to be met. The occasional GVMAP clinic at Northallerton, North
Yorkshire, is proving a success. GVMAP questionnaires show that
96 per cent of patients who responded were satisfied. The GVMAP
will continue for as long as there is a requirement.
The GVMAP continues to refer patients with an initial diagnosis
of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to a country-wide network of
PTSD centres for detailed diagnosis. The network uses specialists
who are familiar with the special nature of military life. The
GVMAP is conducting a study of the subsequent treatment of these
patients and a paper should be published in the Spring.
GULF VETERANS
AND DEPLETED
URANIUM (DU)
The DU Oversight Board (DUOB), which consists of independent
experts, veterans' representatives and MOD officials, continues
to oversee the development of a test to detect the presence of
DU in urine. It will be open to all veterans who wish to receive
it and should be available in the first half of next year. A website
has been established containing minutes of the DUOB's meetings
and members' CVs. (www.duob.org.uk).
MOD has promulgated its policy for biological monitoring
for DU on current and future operations. Those considered to have
received a DU exposure while in theatre will be tested for uranium
exposure. This will include personnel in a vehicle that is struck
by a DU penetrator, personnel entering a vehicle immediately after
a strike and those working on contaminated vehicles after combat.
All other troops in the theatre will be able to receive the same
test if they wish.
Research
MOD's current GVI research portfolio will cost about £8.5
million including VAT. A detailed note on current activities is
attached at Annex A. Following a request from the MOD, the independent
Medical Research Council (MRC) is to review all UK Gulf veterans'
illnesses research and advise on any further research required.
This will take place at the end of January 2003. The MRC's recommendations
and MOD's response will be published.
MORTALITY
The MOD continues to monitor the mortality of Gulf veterans
and the comparison (Era) group. In the period ending 30 June 2002,
551 Gulf veterans had died since 1 April 1991 compared to 547
personnel among the comparison group.
The number of Gulf veterans who died from disease related
causes was lower than in the comparison group, but the number
of Gulf veterans who died from external causes, eg in road traffic
and other transport accidents, was greater. Mortality data as
at 31 December will be released in January. For further information
see:
www.mod.uk/issues/gulfwar/mortality—figures.htm.
Provision of information
KHAMISIYAH
The MOD is reviewing the second technical report and case
narrative published by the US DoD on possible exposures to troops
when chemical warfare rockets were destroyed at Khamisiyah, Iraq
in 1991. A MOD paper will be published soon.
LESSONS IDENTIFIED
We will shortly publish a paper setting out the main health
lessons identified since Operation GRANBY and what the MOD has
done about them.
Financial provision
WAR PENSIONS
MoD is appealing against a Pensions Appeal Tribunal decision
earlier this year, which found in a case that MoD had failed to
show beyond reasonable doubt that "Gulf War Syndrome"
(GWS) was not attributable to service. The overwhelming consensus
of medical and scientific opinion is that the symptoms reported
by some Gulf veterans do not constitute a discrete disorder or
syndrome and so the diagnostic label GWS is not used for War Pensions
purposes. That does not, however, prevent a Gulf veteran getting
a War Pension. To date over 4,800 Gulf veterans have received
awards with about a quarter of these for disablement accepted
as attributable to Gulf service. The appeal hearing is due to
take place in February 2003.
LEGAL CLAIMS
FOR COMPENSATION
Some 2,000 veterans and family members have notified MoD
of their intention to claim compensation if in the future medical
science proves a link between their ill-health and the Gulf conflict.
However, no writs or claims of sufficient detail to proceed have
yet been received.
COMPENSATION FOR
ASBESTOS-RELATED
DISEASE: SECTION
10 OF THE
CROWN PROCEEDINGS
ACT 1947
Prior to May 1987, Service personnel were prevented by law
from pursuing claims for compensation from the Ministry of Defence
by Section 10 of The Crown Proceedings Act 1947. (Crown Immunity
prevented claims from being made prior to 1947.) Section 10 was
repealed by The Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987. Since
the change in the law, which was not made retrospective, Service
personnel who have suffered loss or injury as a result of negligence
by the Ministry of Defence have been entitled to make common law
claims for compensation.
Members of the Armed Forces exposed to asbestos dust and
fibre during service before 15 May 1987 are therefore prevented
by law from receiving compensation from the Ministry of Defence.
The legal position is that even if an ex-Service claimant only
now discovers they have an asbestos related disease, they cannot
sue for compensation, if exposure was before May 1987. Given that
controls over the use of asbestos were introduced in the early
1970s, this is and will be the case for the vast majority of ex-Service
claimants (the time between exposure and the first signs of disease
is typically between 15 and 40 plus years).
When Parliament debated the repeal of Section 10, the question
of retrospection was considered and motions to allow all past
and present members of HM Forces or their dependants to pursue
compensation claims for injury or death were moved. They were
defeated or withdrawn. The view then, as it is now, was that there
is no logical point at which to draw a line, short of trying to
cover all types of injury, and this would create more examples
of unfairness and injustice. The Government, therefore, has no
plans to introduce legislation to allow ex-Service personnel suffering
illness or injury before May 1987 to be paid common law compensation.
Mr Matthews, an ex-Serviceman suffering from an asbestos-related
disease, challenged this position on the basis that Section 10
of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 is incompatible with the European
Convention of Human Rights. The matter was heard in the High Court
in December 2001 and judgement was handed down in favour of the
claimant. The Department secured leave to take this matter expeditiously
to the Court of Appeal which overturned the High Court decision,
but granted leave for Mr Matthews to go to the House of Lords.
The hearing is scheduled to take place on 13, 14 and 15 January
2003.
Compensation in the form of a War Pension is available to
all former members of HM Forces suffering from service attributable
illness or injury. War pensions are paid by the Veterans Agency
and are non-discretionary, not means-tested and are made on a
no-fault, tax free and retrospective basis. They are uprated annually.
The War Pension Scheme also makes provision in the form of a War
Widow's Pension for the widows of Service and ex-Service personnel
whose death is due to or hastened by service. Attributable benefits
may also be available under the AFPS if the attributable condition
led to invaliding or was responsible for the individual's death.
Some veterans believe that there is unfairness in the way
in which claims from former members of HM Forces suffering from
asbestos-related disease are considered, in comparison with claims
from former MOD civilian employees. However, it is the case that
compensation through war pensions and associated allowances or
common law is broadly comparable over time. It is also true that
there is no general unfairness in the way in which these claims
are handled. Against this background, it would be inequitable
to treat this group in isolation in terms of common law compensation
because to do so would create many examples of unfairness and
injustice.
COMPENSATION FOR
NUCLEAR TEST
VETERANS
For some years, ex-Service personnel who participated in
the atmospheric nuclear tests in the late 1950s/early 1960s have
been claiming that their health had been damaged by exposure (deliberately
or accidentally) to ionising radiation. The issue has been raised
many times in both Houses of Parliament and in correspondence
with Ministers.
The UK conducted a total of 21 atmospheric nuclear tests
in Australia and at Malden Island and Christmas Island in the
Pacific Ocean in the 1950s. With the agreement of the UK, the
US also conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests at Christmas
Island in the early 1960s. Some 28,000 UK Service personnel were
involved in the test programme and UK personnel were present at
the US tests at Christmas Island. In addition, Service personnel
from Australia, New Zealand and Fiji took part.
The Government's frequently stated position is that there
is no evidence of excess illness or mortality amongst the veterans
as a group which could be linked to their participation in the
tests or to exposure to radiation as a result of that participation.
Formal and well-documented procedures were in place to ensure
the health and safety of those participating in the tests. Their
task was to provide logistic support (mainly construction work),
and certainly not to be the subject of the tests (ie "guinea
pigs").
This position is borne out by the studies into the health
of test veterans carried out by staff from the National Radiological
Protection Board and the Imperial Cancer Research Fund which showed
that for the veterans as a group their participation in the nuclear
test programme has not had a detectable effect on their expectation
of life, or on their risk of developing cancer or other fatal
diseases. There is also no evidence to suggest that the health
of their families has been affected.
Both studies were carried out independently of the Ministry
of Defence and a third study is currently being undertaken. The
study report is expected to be published in the first half of
next year.
The Department's consistent line has been that we have every
confidence in the independent studies, and there are no grounds
for compensation to be paid to British nuclear test veterans.
However, where individual veterans are able to produce reliable
evidence to raise a reasonable doubt that their illness is related
to their service, they are entitled to a war pension. As at 19
November 2002, there are 30 war pensions being paid to nuclear
test veterans associated with their participation in nuclear tests
(16 of these are to nuclear test veterans themselves and the remainder
to widows).
Two test cases were examined by the European Commission of
Human Rights and subsequently referred to the European Court of
Human Rights. The Court delivered its judgement on 9 June 1998,
finding no violations of the Convention on Human Rights. The Court
made no pronouncement on the exposure of veterans to radiation
and nor therefore on their claims for compensation for illness
caused by alleged exposure to radiation.
In July this year, we became aware that two firms of lawyers
have been instructed by a number of individual veterans and their
families to investigate the possibility of bringing an action
against the MOD. The Legal Services Commission is funding preliminary
investigations and has granted a generic certificate to both firms
to investigate a possible action against MOD. Nothing has been
heard from the solicitors or about their work since July.
An adjournment debate granted to Mark Todd MP entitled "Nuclear
Test Veterans (Compensation)" took place on 4 December 2002
in Westminster Hall. A number of MPs spoke in support of compensation
for Nuclear Test Veterans, but no new issues were raised.
In view of all the evidence, there are no grounds for compensation
to be paid to British nuclear test veterans.
VETERANS AGENCY
(VA) PROGRESS
The following provides a brief report on progress made by
the VA following the change of name in April 2002.
Why was the War Pensions Agency renamed the Veterans Agency?
By launching the Veterans' Initiative and, as part of this,
creating the VA, the Government has taken a major step in raising
the profile of veterans among the public and towards ensuring
that veterans' needs are met in a co-ordinated way across Departments
and local government. It also highlights progress being made to
co-ordinate initiatives across the MOD and Government wide and
improve services to veterans. The change to the Agency's name
supports the Ministerial intention that the Agency should provide
a special focus for support for veterans, and the ongoing organisational
review may result in further changes to the Agency's role.
It has long been recognised that "war pensions"
is linked in many people's minds to active service, often even
more specifically to service during the Second World War. Using
the Agency as a key deliverer of veterans' services without a
change of name to reflect the wider remit would run the risk that
potential clients would wrongly exclude themselves.
The Agency has strong links with the ex-Service community
and the change has been largely welcomed.
Performance of the helpline
From April 2002 the Agency launched a dedicated veterans'
helpline providing advice and information to all veterans (and
their dependants) on a range of veterans issues. The Helpline
has incorporated the service previously provided by the Veterans
Advice Unit and operates a charge free system. The aim is to provide
a single Departmental focus for veterans to seek help accessing
Government, local government and non-Governmental services. The
Department has been able to utilise the Helpline to assist veterans
during high profile media issues, such as the Armed Forces Pension
taxation issue. The helpline acted as a first port of call advising
veterans whether they may in fact be eligible for a refund and
providing direction on what action to take. The Agency was able
to react quickly to the increase in calls, answering around an
extra 3000 calls in the first week.
Since the launch of the extended remit of the helpline, 185,938
calls have been answered in comparison to 169,550 over the same
period last year (April-November). The majority of enquiries relate
to war pensions, although general veterans' enquiries range from
requests for replacement medals to copies of Service records and
housing enquiries.
Performance of the website
To complement the helpline, a new Veterans Agency website
has been launched. This provides advice and information on a range
of issues facing veterans. The aim is to provide the answer to
enquiries or to signpost a veteran to where he or she can obtain
the help required. Since July this year there have been 106,622
visits to the website, with "hits" to Service medals
and links to veterans organisations being some of the most popular.
Work continues to enhance the site and build on the information
provided.
The Agency recently re-launched the site with enhancements
to the content and usability of the material available and continues
to make further improvements. We have utilised colleagues in the
MOD and ex-Service community to help develop the content and have
received positive, unsolicited feedback.
Communications
To introduce the VA and its new services, articles have been
placed in a wide range of ex-Service, Service and other magazines.
In addition the Agency informed over 435,000 veterans through
its annual notification—Focus on Veterans—and is planning
to place a leaflet in a forthcoming issue of the Legion magazine.
Around 500,000 veterans receive this publication. The VA will
be monitoring the effect of this campaign to establish effectiveness
and to help inform future communication exercises.
We have and are continuing to develop links with regimental
associations and resettlement centres in order to ensure that
veterans and Service leavers are made aware of the help that can
be provided if required. More information is also contained in
the Department for Work and Pensions Service leavers and pensioners
guides.
The Agency is working with the MOD regional press officers
to utilise the local press, and we have joined our colleagues
on the National Defence Tourer exhibition raising awareness of
veterans and the VA to the general public in venues such as shopping
centres, public exhibitions and shows.
In a wider sense, the VA is developing a communications strategy
for the Veterans' Initiative to communicate key messages about
veterans-related work to audiences within Government, the veterans'
community and wider public. Once agreed at Ministerial level,
this will be published and publicised.
Annex A
RESEARCH INTO GULF VETERANS' ILLNESSES
MOD FUNDED RESEARCH
Cancer
A1. A team at the University of Manchester is studying
the incidence of cancers in Gulf veterans. The study will aim
to answer the questions of whether Gulf veterans are at more risk
than those who did not deploy. The study is due to complete in
Spring 2003 and will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific
journal.
Neuromuscular symptoms study
A2. Some results of a neuromuscular symptoms study, conducted
by Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine (GKT), were
published on 26 November. The researchers found no evidence for
a specific neuromuscular disorder that could be linked to deployment
in the Gulf conflict. Further results are to be published in the
scientific literature.
Paraoxonase study
A3. A team at Manchester Royal Infirmary, collaborating
with GKT, studied the level of paraoxonase (a blood enzyme that
metabolises organophosphates) in randomly selected Gulf, Bosnia
and non-deployed veterans. The study is now complete and results
should be published next year.
Study of UK Gulf veterans
A4. The MOD has funded a study of the changing health
of Gulf veterans over time. The current health of a cohort of
UK Gulf veterans was compared to their health as identified in
a US funded study three years ago. The study is now complete and
the results are expected to be submitted for publication in a
peer-reviewed scientific journal soon.
Vaccines Interactions Research
A5. The Vaccines Interactions Research programme continues
at Porton Down. 48 marmosets have been administered with vaccines
and pyridostigmine bromide (the active ingredient of NAPS—nerve
agent pre-treatment sets- tablets) in combination and singly and
their cognitive performance, immune responsiveness and other indicators
are being studied over a period of 18 months. We plan to report
some preliminary findings in the Spring. The research is due to
complete in 2003.
Systematic literature review
A6. A literature review conducted by the University of
Wales is complete. The results of work on reproductive health,
mortality, multi-symptom illness, psychiatric disorders, painful
conditions and hospitalisation are being submitted for publication
as a series of papers in peer reviewed scientific literature.
Study into the social construction of "Gulf War Syndrome"
A7. MOD is part-funding a Medical Anthropology PhD student
at the University of London who is studying people's beliefs and
feelings about "Gulf War Syndrome".
Reproductive health
A8. The MOD funded study of Gulf veterans' reproductive
health is now complete. This is the first comprehensive survey
of total reproductive health among Gulf veterans. Publication
is expected in 2003.
Squalene
A9. Some veterans have expressed concern that squalene
was present in inoculations they received during the Gulf conflict.
Vaccine samples were tested by an independent laboratory, which
reported in May that no squalene was found. The full report is
available at www.mod.uk/issues/gulfwar/info/medical/squalene.
DEFRA FUNDED RESEARCH
Organophosphate (OP) pesticide
A10. A number of research programmes looking at OP pesticides
are underway. These programmes are sponsored by DEFRA but closely
monitored by MOD. Results of the cohort study of sheep dip exposure
and dippers' flu were published in May. A study into low-level
exposure to OPs on foetal and childhood health was published in
August. Results of the study into dose effects of OP sheep dip
on brain electron function and performance in non-human primates
are with DEFRA prior to publication. In 2003, results from a study
into the mechanisms of toxicity should be available, together
with those on the characteristics of non-acetylcholinesterase
action of OP by identification of novel protein targets. An investigation
of possible automatic responses induced by OP exposure should
also be completed in 2003. In 2005 the study of disabling neuropsychiatric
disease in farmers exposed to OPs is due to be published.
1
Current Activity Relating to Gulf Veterans' Illnesses, dated January
2002. Back
| 
