Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-99)
MINISTRY OF
DEFENCE
18 FEBRUARY 2008
Q80 Mr Davidson: That is neither
here nor there then.
Air Commodore Miles: It is a small
number of officers who are Early Service Leavers of the total
numbers. In terms of the benefits that we provide—
Q81 Mr Davidson: No. I recognise
evasive action when I see it. I do not think that you are responding
to the points that I am raising with you. Could I ask you to look
at paragraph 2.9 where, in the final paragraph there it says,
"82 per cent of officers who attended the `Self employment
awareness and small business start-up' workshop found it useful
... ", but only 48% of the junior ranks who attended. Why
should something be constructed in a way that is more acceptable
to the officers than to junior ranks? Why should the percentages
not be equal?
Air Commodore Miles: The course
is constructed to be acceptable to all Service Leavers. The sad
fact is sometimes some people choose courses which perhaps they
are not best suited to. They are advised on which courses they
should do.
Q82 Mr Davidson: The officers are
choosing which courses they are suited to but the other ranks
are not. Presumably that is bad advice, is it not, on which courses
are most appropriate to them? I would not accept this in a school
from careers advisers or anybody else with responsibility for
directing somebody to a particular course that was relevant to
them so I do not see why I should accept it here.
Sir Bill Jeffrey: The scheme itself
is open to all ranks. That is the basis on which it is constructed.
Some elements of it probably get better scores from some ranks
than others. It is not set up to be rank conscious.
Q83 Mr Davidson: All of the people
who go to this presumably are self-selecting after advice?
Air Commodore Miles: Yes.
Q84 Mr Davidson: Why is it that those
amongst the other ranks who have expressed an interest in this
are less satisfied with it than the officers?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: I think some
of this may come back to the discussion we were having earlier
about the extent to which, as one gets down to unit level, this
scheme has been well managed in the past. As Air Commodore Miles
was saying, in the Army in particular, there has been a big programme
of effort to improve the way it is managed, including support
given for people expressing an interest in it.
Q85 Mr Davidson: You can understand
my concern?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: I understand
the concern very well.
Q86 Mr Davidson: In paragraph 4.2—this
is the briefings on financial awareness—to some extent this
has been covered but it is surely a disgrace that 47% of officers
attended but only 20% from the other ranks because presumably
they think it is not for the likes of them.
Sir Bill Jeffrey: It is a judgment
that they need to make about their own decisions.
Q87 Mr Davidson: That is right. We
have recognised already I think that you acknowledge that you
will not be providing the sort of financial advice that the other
ranks might want but you have undertaken to do that in the future.
That is correct, is it not?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: That is the
position.
Q88 Mr Davidson: Do you think you
would have found that out if it had not been for the NAO chasing
you?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: I hope so, yes.
Q89 Mr Davidson: I hope so as well
but that is not quite an answer. Is there a mechanism within your
system that would identify this? What worries me when the MoD
consistently come in front of us is that you discover things once
the NAO draws them to your attention. I do not blame you but you
are the one who happens to be here so I will raise it with you.
It seems that these points never come into their consciousness.
Sir Bill Jeffrey: It is for me
to answer. You question us about NAO Reports which uncover shortcomings.
If you look at this one as a whole, it uncovered many fewer shortcomings
than strengths because this is an area where I think we are doing
remarkably well. We are doing remarkably well because of the commitment
of a number of individuals like Air Commodore Miles who are very
much alert to ways in which they can improve it. Briefing myself
for this hearing, my sense was that this was genuinely an area
where there was an attitude of continuous improvement, looking
for ways of making the thing—
Q90 Mr Davidson: I think that is
not unreasonable. You are doing far better than you did in the
past but the fact that it is not good enough still should not
be a cause for complacency. If I look at paragraph 3.16 which
some of my colleagues have touched on, towards the bottom it says:
"Of those single survey respondents who did not own a house
prior to discharge, only 13 per cent stated that they were put
in contact with, or made aware of assistance provided by SPACES."
That seems to me to be disgraceful. That is the group for whom
this is most designed and they are not made aware of it.
Sir Bill Jeffrey: That is the
point on which we have taken action since the NAO reported.
Q91 Mr Davidson: In that case, we
can just get an update, Chairman. Can I ask the NAO something?
In paragraph 3.18 you mentioned the legislation in England and
Wales but since these are people being discharged from the British
Army, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy you should surely
also be covering the Northern Ireland and Scottish situations
in terms of legislation?
Mr Andrews: I do not know the
position in Scotland but the cases where we identified problems
were in England and Wales.[6]
Q92 Mr Davidson: You did not identify
any problems in Scotland or Northern Ireland?
Mr Andrews: That is not to say
that they are not there.
Q93 Mr Davidson: This surely ought
to have related to the legislation?
Mr Burr: I think that is right.
Q94 Mr Davidson: So we will not have
that again then?
Mr Baker: We are now taking this
up with the Scottish Executive. We needed to get the amendment
into the Housing Bill in Westminster first.
Q95 Mr Davidson: In paragraph 3.21,
there is the point about a small number of local authorities that
are behaving badly. Can you name them?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: Again, at the
risk of sounding as though I am attempting to avoid the question,
I will certainly take that away, consult local government departments
and see whether we can do so.[7]
Q96 Mr Davidson: Can I turn finally to
paragraph 3.26 which says in the final couple of lines: "
... it is difficult to say with any accuracy the percentage of
homeless people who have served in the Armed Forces." Given
that some of your weapons can travel thousands of miles and hit
targets as small as that door, surely identifying the number of
ex-service personnel who are homeless is not beyond the bounds
of possibility? It is an indication that you do not give this
much of a priority, the fact that you are not able to do this,
and that you do not pursue after the initial period the lives
of those who have served as assiduously as you ought.
Mr Baker: We have some data from
the DCLG which does show that this is a very small problem in
relation to the total homelessness issue in the United Kingdom
and, in terms of following up, in a sense you have made the point.
Some of these people can be servicemen for a very short period
of time and then can become homeless very much later after having
had a variety of other experiences. We simply do not have—
Q97 Mr Davidson: That is interesting.
My experience, having come across quite a number of these individuals,
is that quite often their entire lives have been established or
set in a pattern because of their experience in these services.
They are used to taking orders; they are used to being in a structured
environment; they are used to heavy drinking and, when they lose
the surrounding environment in which they continued with their
alcohol, their lives just fell to bits. I understand that they
might very well have gone through a number of other experiences
but are you not culpable for not following this up?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: The picture
you describe is a familiar one and my sense is that that must
be one of the factors that is around. What is striking though
is that our Department of Communities and Local Government colleagues
believe that the level of homelessness among ex-service people
is falling. Although it depends on the question you ask, a striking
statistic is that only 0.1% of all homelessness acceptances recorded
by that Department were attributable to vulnerability due to time
spent in HM forces. That is not to say that there were not more
who were ex-service men and women but our sense is that it is
numerically less of an issue than one might imagine.
Q98 Mr Mitchell: In paragraph 3.21
it says that a small number of local authorities are delaying
acceptance of a main homelessness duty. What is the main homelessness
duty?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: The duty to
provide accommodation for those who are homeless within the terms
of the relevant housing legislation.
Q99 Mr Mitchell: They have a duty
to provide accommodation for those with families?
Sir Bill Jeffrey: Yes, they do.
6 Ev 20 Back
7
Ev 21 Back
| 
