| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
21 Apr 2009 : Column 13WH—continued
In my own constituency, broken families from the armed services often land up in the outstandingly good Cotswold family centre, which is a little known organisation. It is a problem when a soldier abandons his family,
because the family is living in military quarters. I am afraid that the MOD takes a hard-nosed attitude, and evicts the family quite quickly. Where does that family then go? It has no local connection. Many families end up in the Cotswold family centre in Corsham. Over the years, there has been talk of closing the centre. I very much hope that the Government will not cast their cutting eyes over it either now or in future, because it carries out outstanding work for families and veterans at some of the more difficult times in their lives.
Finally, I would like to touch on the question that was raised by the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire about how our veterans—or some of our veterans—tend to end up in the lowest part of our society. The National Association of Probation Officers has come up with some figures, which the Government may call questionable. The association says that 8,500 ex-service personnel are in prison. I do not know if that is correct; the number may be lower. I am interested to know how many ex-servicemen are in prison. It would be fairly questionable if the Government were to turn round and say that they do not know. The armed services are the only ones who have the numbers. We know all about every single armed service person, so surely we can find out how many of them are in prison. If we cannot do so, it says an awful lot, both about our veterans system and about our prison system.
Having worked out how many ex-servicemen are in prison, we should then find out—again the Government say that they do not know this—how many of them have post-traumatic stress disorder. Having witnessed conditions in theatres of war, it is hardly surprising that some of those people have very severe mental disorders later in life. It may be 20 years after their service that these things come back to haunt them. Such experience may result in imprisonment. The Government should know how many people are in prison as a result of PTSD. At the moment, they do not.
Incidentally, the same applies to the question of alcoholism and drug abuse. The figures from the department of community mental health show that of the 2,500 military people who presented at the centres in 2007, some 217 are taking drugs, 150 are alcoholics, 400 have mood disorders, 314 are depressive, 1,188 have neurotic disorders, 145 have post-traumatic stress disorder and so on. The department has told us that some 2,500 people, or 1.9 per cent. of our armed services, are suffering from such conditions in prison and the Government, apparently, do not know it. It is important that we should at least begin to bottom that out.
Before we can cure the problem, we need to know how many people are suffering. It is astonishing that the Government say that they do not know. One strong message to be sent back from this debate is that we recognise that people suffer terrible consequences from the action that they take in the theatre of war on behalf of society. When they come back, they may suffer from drink, drug or mental disorders and they may end up in prison. It is the Government’s fundamental duty to know how many people are suffering in such a way and to put in place some means of finding a solution. I know that that is easier said than done, but it is important that we recognise the problem and start to work on it.
This issue is not just about saluting and thanking our veterans. That is easily done every year on Remembrance Sunday, and at the Cenotaph and all the time in Wootton
Bassett and elsewhere. The tough bit is for the Government and society to say to the armed services, “We recognise that the things that we ask you to do sometimes result in appalling consequences for you in your private lives. We will recognise that you and the armed services are doing more than other categories of employee, and we will go out of our way to find out what has gone wrong with you and to put it right.”
Mr. Roger Gale (in the Chair): I need to call Members making winding-up speeches from 10.30 am, so I invite the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mark Williams) to make a brief contribution.
10.25 am
Mark Williams (Ceredigion) (LD): It is a privilege to be called to speak in the debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams), who has given a very thorough account of the issue before us. His contribution will lessen my load in the next five minutes.
I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me when I say that although I pay tribute to him for initiating the debate, I was more struck in many ways by the contribution of the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Benyon). When he talked about the transition from a tight-knit community to civilian life, it reminded me of a constituent who came to see me a few weeks ago. He left the forces after a distinguished career and was attempting to readjust to civilian life. He enrolled on a university degree course, but found that the flexibility of student life created many problems for him. He abandoned his course and had persistent difficulties with the Department for Work and Pensions. I am sure that he would be the first to admit that he was floundering in civilian life. He said that he simply did not know where to turn. The repeated message today is about the lack of information for veterans as they leave the forces.
I agree with what the hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray) said about the celebration of the role of our forces being the easy bit. We will be doing that in my constituency on Saturday when the county of Ceredigion awards the freedom of Ceredigion to the Royal Welsh Regiment. That event is important to the veterans, the serving forces and the community. It should galvanise a great deal of support, and hundreds will be on the streets of Aberystwyth on Saturday. Nevertheless, there is a bigger picture, and we must consider day-to-day life for our ex-servicemen.
Last October in this Chamber, we had a debate on the state pension and benefits. I was able to raise the Royal British Legion’s return to rationing campaign. My hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire mentioned some figures, which I will repeat, because he was right to highlight the fact that 38 per cent. of veterans, their spouses, widows and widowers live on an income lower than that considered necessary for a healthy lifestyle. Some 75 per cent. of the ex-service community live on an income of less than £10,000. One important small measure would be to redesignate council tax benefit as a rebate. The Lyons report revealed that when take-up was labelled a rebate, the figure was up to 90 per cent.—as a benefit it is 55 to 60 per cent, which is a matter of acute concern.
I pay tribute to the Ministry of Defence for its six pilot schemes. We have a good one in Cardiff. The number of referrals has increased from a handful to something approaching 90 in the first nine months. None the less, will the Minister give us some sort of appraisal as to where he thinks those pilots are going and what the roll-out will be? The British Legion is concerned that there is an element of uncertainty about what happens next.
The hon. Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) mentioned the availability of information for people using the voluntary sector. The Royal British Legion in my constituency undertakes a huge amount of valuable pastoral work, as do many other organisations. It has requested that lists of returning veterans be made available so that it can contribute to their readjustment in times of transition. There is concern about the lack of cohesion in government. We are all praising the Minister for what he said about the inadequacies of the “New Horizons” programme. However, his message has not got across to all parts of Government.
We heard about untreated mental illness causing problems for veterans. Those problems make it difficult for veterans to adjust to normal life and hold down a job, and can ultimately lead to homelessness. A 2007 report by the Sir Oswald Stoll Foundation estimated that up to one homeless person in 10 has a background in the forces. Again, the difficulty is that we do not know the extent of the problem. When we talk about the close-knit family and the transition, we should not always assume that everybody has the luxury of moving from one close-knit family to another. That is manifestly not the case. That is why we are here today and why my hon. Friend initiated this important debate.
10.30 am
Willie Rennie (Dunfermline and West Fife) (LD): I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams) for securing this debate. He gave a powerful exposition of the case. I am sure that his constituents, many of whom are veterans, and many people throughout the UK will be grateful for his advocacy. I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ceredigion (Mark Williams) on his short speech. Sometimes the best speeches are made in the shortest possible time.
Bob Spink: The hon. Gentleman is congratulating the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mark Williams), who made a point about the support and advice for families and veterans. The need for those is increasing, but one organisation that has not been mentioned is the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association, which is doing excellent work, particularly in my constituency in Essex.
Willie Rennie: A huge range of organisations do excellent work—the hon. Gentleman mentioned one of them. The Fife Veterans Association in my patch is a great group of people. It provides not only social contact, but support for people who are finding life outside the military a little difficult. The hon. Gentleman is right about that, but I am not sure whether I agree with his earlier point that Members of Parliament would be a great magnet to attract people to join the Royal British Legion. I am not sure that we are the best sales people in the world when it comes to membership of organisations. However, his sentiments are right.
The hon. Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) made a very strong speech about the support groups that are available and the work that is being done in Blackpool. I am sure that it was an enjoyable few weeks in Blackpool—it seemed to be one big party from what I understand. It was good to hear about that.
The hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray) also made a good speech. Perhaps I should read The Sun more often, because this is the first time I have heard of the idea of a “Highway for Heroes”. I, too, think that it would be completely inappropriate. It is not about names—what really matters is the encouragement and support that is given. The hon. Gentleman also referred to the TA.
I disagree with the hon. Gentleman on the Gurkhas. I know that there are difficulties with the continuation of support for the Gurkhas and I understand that the Minister has been to Nepal for discussions on the matter. I would like to hear more about those discussions, but we need to pay more respect to the work that the Gurkhas have done over the years, so I am pleased that we are making some progress.
Everyone praises the work of charities that support the veterans. A special bond is formed by those who have served in the forces over the years. The decreasing size of the armed forces since the second world war means that the number of veterans is decreasing significantly, but that makes the bond still stronger. Despite that, many veterans deeply resent having to rely on charity to deal with the issues that they face. They firmly believe that the state is responsible and should give greater assistance, and that they should not have to rely on charity for support.
I have a great deal of sympathy with that point of view but, actually, a lot of the veterans whom I meet do not want to become dependent on the state, and the charities with which I come into contact certainly do not want all their eggs in one basket—they do not want all their funding to come from the Government. However, we have not got the balance right. The Government need to provide greater support for veterans to deal with their difficulties.
The Minister is moving in the right direction. I served on the Defence Committee with him; he was outspoken then, and I am pleased that he has not changed tack since. He is doing a very good job as the Minister with responsibility for veterans. There is a lot to be delivered, but I am sure that he has the determination to see it through. We need to strike the right balance, which we have not done so far, and I would like more Government support for veterans.
When providing priority health care for veterans—this was mentioned in the debate—was announced 18 months or so ago, it was claimed that up to 4 million veterans could benefit, but when Ministers from the Department of Health and the Ministry of Defence appeared before the Defence Committee, they were unable to predict what the demand would be. I know that there have been some problems with identifying veterans and alerting the health service so that they receive priority care, but that initiative has been going for 18 months, so I would like the Minister to give examples of veterans receiving priority care. What difference has the policy has made? Has it cut the waiting time for receiving treatment, or is the difference marginal or insignificant? I hope that it works and that veterans get the priority care that they
need. It is not about queue jumping, but ensuring that, if everything else is equal, veterans get support above others.
The identity card idea is a good one. It would mean that veterans may identify themselves as being from the military if they so wish—they do not have to, but they may use the card to get priority treatment. That is a good model. Rather than identifying every veteran on their health records, people who have served in the military could show the ID card to get the priority treatment if they wished to do so.
My hon. Friend the Member for Ceredigion mentioned mental health pilots. I was pleased that the six pilots were set up, because this is one of the biggest problems that we need to get a grip on. People with mental health problems are presenting themselves earlier to charities such as Combat Stress. The average age of people presenting used to be about 20 years older than it is now. There is significantly less of a stigma, which is a very good thing. I understand that the pilots will be completed at the end of this year and that there will be some evaluation off the back of them. I am interested in the next step. How and when will the pilots be rolled out, and what kind of funding will be available? Will the difficulties with the Government’s finances have any impact on any roll-out, or is the MOD determined to ensure that it is a priority in its plans for the coming years? Will the Minister tell us exactly what is happening in that regard?
Reference has been made to Help for Heroes. I understand that the charity has raised some £17 million in a very short time, £12 million of which has already been paid out. A man called George Connelly, who lives in the village of Culross in my constituency, is bringing bands from all three military services into the village for a special “Musical Spectacular” at the end of July. People such as him do a tremendous amount of work and we should pay tribute to them.
Credit should also be given to the Government for their armed forces day on 27 June. I am keen to support it in my part of the world and to get those flags flying from every flag pole—I am sure that the Scottish National party Administration would love the Union flag flying everywhere. The armed forces day is important, as are veterans medals. My aunt was delighted to receive her land army badge in Canada recently, so I thank the Minister for that.
As I said, the Minister has been to Nepal for discussions because of concerns about the continuation of the flow of people to serve in the Gurkhas. What impression was he given in Nepal and what agreements has he managed to come to? The Gurkhas are also eagerly awaiting an announcement from the Home Secretary at the end of this week. Is that still on schedule? We want a fair and honourable settlement for the Gurkhas. They have committed so much for us, and the new arrangements must reflect that.
My final point is more of a technical one and relates to devolution. One thing that the Minister and I discovered when we were on the Defence Committee was that in the devolved Administrations, military issues often fall between the stools. Because the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly assume that the MOD is dealing with veterans’ health or education for service families, they do not think that they should consider such issues.
A recent press announcement stated that injured war veterans will be given council house priority. The UK Minister for Housing and the Minister who is in his seat here made that announcement. Will similar schemes apply in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland? What discussions have been held? Is that an example of our having managed to break down the barriers and hold regular discussions with all the other Administrations to ensure that best practice spreads throughout the UK? Different parts of the UK will make their own decisions, but are we ensuring that what we decide within the MOD is transferred out to other parts of the United Kingdom? Our armed forces and veterans deserve the best possible support, and I am sure that the MOD and the Minister will be keen to deliver it.
10.41 am
Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury) (Con): I draw the House’s attention to my interests as a member of the reserve forces and a service veteran.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams) on securing this timely and extremely important debate. We all have constituents who are veterans and, particularly at this time, it behoves us to look closely at their interests and the obligations that we as a society owe them.
The hon. Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble) talked about coroners, to pick out one item from her speech. That issue interests me, because the Wiltshire coroner is in my constituency, in Trowbridge. I visited his court when he was sitting on matters dealing with deceased servicemen, and he runs an exceptionally good service. It is questionable, however, whether the MOD should be using public funds to hire barristers in what are meant to be non-adversarial situations. The service families to whom I have spoken in that connection rather resent the resulting unequal playing field. I urge the Minister to minimise the use of barristers in that way, as it is regarded as unfair.
My hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray) rightly mentioned Wootton Bassett and the tribute that it pays to deceased veterans. We hear a lot of bad things about our society sometimes, but it is a tribute to people that they are prepared to turn up and pay their respects in that way. That is a lesson for others to learn. I echo his words about the Cotswold family centre, which I know from my previous professional life does an extremely good job. That service would be sorely missed if the Minister were tempted to remove it.
Among a number of points, the hon. Member for Dunfermline and West Fife (Willie Rennie) mentioned ID cards for veterans. I support the idea, but with a couple of caveats: it must bring a tangible benefit, and the cost must be accommodated in some way. There has been a lot of tokenism, and we do not want an ID card that is simply a token. I do not think that veterans would welcome such a thing.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |