Showing posts with label Ministry of Defence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ministry of Defence. Show all posts

Thursday, 5 July 2012

THE OLD CONTEMPT FOR WALES

As we wait to hear about the cuts to Welsh Regiments, the news that that the Ministry of Defence decided not to participate in an enquiry by the Welsh Affairs Committee (chaired by David Davies MP for Monmouth) into the future of the remaining Welsh Regiments should not come as much of a surprise. The MoD along with much of Whitehall has a pretty clear track record of being pretty dismissive of Welsh concerns and interests, whether they are related to the impact of defence cuts or the historic acquisition of land in Wales for artillery ranges.

Monday, 31 October 2011

VETERANS INQUIRY

News that MPs are going to look at the services and support provided for our veterans and service personnel returning from active service duty is to be welcomed. Around 250,000 armed forces veterans live in Wales and their treatment will be looked at by the Commons' Welsh Affairs Committee. The inquiry will look at the support offered to former personnel and will ask whether government departments co-ordinate their activities. Medical and mental-health services will be considered by the MP’s. Evidence will be taken on the support services received by veterans and their families, including provision to help former military personnel resettle after completion of their service. Military housing for service personnel and their families still leaves a great deal to be desired. Our current and former service personnel and their families deserve better than they have got from previous Government. Will things get better? The precedents are not good, its worth remembering that sadly the bottom line is that live heroes, as ironically a predecessor Conservative - Liberal Coalition Government found out cost far more than dead ones.

Friday, 30 September 2011

PRIORITIES?

In the game of trying to look good, win brownie points and in effort to appear like the Con Dem Government is actually doing something - the UK Westminster government says it will make £250m available to help English councils keep or restore weekly bin collections and is to launch a consultation on increasing the speed limit on England and Wales' motorways from 70mph to 80mph. Obviously its a question of priorities which may not go down so well with the 1,020 Royal Navy personnel who are set to hear whether or not they are to be made redundant as part of a first round of cuts.

Last years Strategic Defence and Security Review triggered a whole set of redundancies and cuts within the Defence sector. The next round of redundancies is due in March 2010 as the Ministry of Defence sheds some 25,000 civilian staff over the next four years. Hmmm that should help with the recovery (not) along with the other cuts to the public sector not to mention the firm hand that the Conservatives (sorry Com Dems) have taken with the banks (not).

Friday, 8 April 2011

A THOUGHT ON MOD REDUNDANCIES

News that the Con Dem Government plans to make service personnel redundant at a time when the level of overseas commitments are increasing is something that could make you wonder about the competence and the judgement of the UK Government let alone wonder whether or not the left hand knows what the right hand is actually doing. Any of our servicemen and women who are going to be made redundant need to be able to fully access timely advice on a wide spectrum of issues including: welfare benefits, employment advice, budgetary and life skills, debt management, alcohol and drug treatment, and relationship skills, in order to tackle the feeling of isolation experienced by many on leaving the forces.

Some of our Servicemen and women found out on Monday (4th April) about the terms of redundancy for 560 soldiers and 1,600 sailors. All in all some twenty-five thousand civil servants and 17,000 armed personnel in the army, navy and RAF will lose their jobs by 2015 due to budget cuts. The UK Government has a duty to honour the military covenant, which is enshrined in law so the UK government must do all it can to make training for service people leaving the forces mandatory. Anything less would be a blatant betrayal of our armed forces personnel and the often hazardous work they do.

Now a week is a long time on politics, on Friday (8th April) we learned that the Prime Minister is “actively engaged” in a reassessment of Britain's military capabilities and planned reductions in equipment and manpower. The Daily Telegraph said that the rethink has raised hopes that some of the cuts to military aircraft and ships in the Strategic Defence and Security Review could be postponed or even reversed. Insiders said it was not too late for a change of mind on the decision to cut the number of RAF Tornado's and scrap surveillance planes. Some Royal Navy frigates could also be spared, or have their retirement delayed.

In what may well be the first sign of compromise (or a not so carefully camouflaged U-Turn) on defence cuts, Cameron has now ordered the Treasury to give the Ministry of Defence a reprieve on its overspent 2011-12 budget. This £800 million climbdown will spare the Armed Forces further cuts this year. Senior government figures admitted that the Libyan conflict has raised questions about the wisdom of cuts that will leave Britain facing a “dip” in its military capabilities for several years.

The BBC notes that some analysts suggest that the MoD budget will come under renewed strain next year, with some of the pain simply deferred unless deeper cuts are made in 2012 or extra money is found for defence. A U-turn on a deeply unpopular cut or not, that's open to question - but one thing is true it is unacceptable to treat our service men and women in such an irresponsible and high handed and cavalier manner.

Tuesday, 28 July 2009

Duty

Robert E Lee said "Duty is the most sublime word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less." Our soldiers in Afghanistan are doing their duty and they are sadly paying a high price in yet another distant foreign field – it’s a pity the same cannot be said of the Government.

At home, the New Labour Westminster Government is to launch an appeal over two soldiers who won significant increases in their compensation paid for injuries received in line with their duties. The test case revolves around two soldiers who had their compensation increased on appeal; one who now walks with crutches after being shot while on patrol in Iraq, who was originally awarded £9,250 but this was increased to £46,000 and another who fractured his thigh in a military exercise and who was awarded £8,250, but this was increased to £28,750.

The High Court previously upholding the higher awards, ruled that the Ministry of Defence argument that there should be a distinction between the original injury and later complications was "absurd". Now the MoD (no doubt with the tacit blessing of the New Labour Money changers) is to take a case to the Court of Appeal, where Government lawyers are expected to claim the pair should be compensated only for the initial injuries and not subsequent health problems.

The MoD has faced repeated criticism of the way it deals with wounded personnel. In 2008 some £84million in civil compensation was paid out, but, by contrast, men and women wounded in combat have to struggle to win even modest payments. The controversial Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (established in April 2005) puts the burden of proof on claimants, who must provide evidence that they were injured doing their duty. Campaigners say many claims that would have been allowed under the old rules are now blocked. MoD figures show that around a third of all claims are now rejected.

In 2008 the MoD doubled the maximum lump-sum payment to £570,000, only the most catastrophic injuries attain that sum. Currently even the loss of both arms or total blindness would not qualify. Particular concerns have been expressed about the treatment of service personnel with mental health disorders. Compensation for psychological injury is effectively capped at £48,875.

The case will be heard as the death toll in Afghanistan continues to rise, with two more soldiers being killed bringing the total for this month to 20 fatalities. Since the start of operations in Afghanistan began in the autumn of 2001, 191 British service personnel have been killed.