You are here: Home » Comment »

Taking better care of our Veterans

June 30, 2012 9:55 am

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

To mark Armed Forces Day, we’re reproducing this post from May 2011 on the need for a Department for Veretans’ Affairs:

David Cameron wants to enshrine the military covenant in law. This can only be a good thing. Putting aside questions as to what should be in such a covenant, and why it took the PM so long to announce this when he made a similar announcement a year ago, Labour should fully endorse the plans. But we should also push the Tories to go further. We should propose the establishment of a department for veterans’ affairs.

Labour’s reputation on the armed forces has suffered in recent years. Whether fair or not there is a public perception that Labour sent troops into battle without the appropriate equipment or necessary helicopter support. And yet when the Tories cut allowances to serving troops (as Bob Ainsworth noted here recently) or sack RAF pilots, there is barely a whisper of discontent in the media. The Tories present themselves as the party of the armed forces and they are taken at their word.

Pushing for a specific government department, with a minister and all of the visibility and accountability that implies, would show to serving and former service personnel (and their families) that Labour is serious about the problems that they face, and ensure that our service personnel receive the support and treatment they deserve. It shouldn’t be left to “Help for Heroes” – although they do amazing work – it should be the government’s duty to provide that level of support and care as a matter of course.

Those within the party who have misgivings about the party’s military entanglements could find much to support in a department for veterans’ affairs too. A government and a society that is more upfront about the sacrifices made to wage war – and the often horrific outcomes of those sacrifices – should be more circumspect about engaging in military action in future.

Providing our troops with a fair deal appeals to the vast majority of our nation – across boundaries of class, race, religion and geography – and it is ground that the Conservatives have decisively seized. This is our opportunity to say that Labour will be unflinching when it is necessary to send young people into combat, but we will be equally unflinching in our determination to see them taken care of too.

20120630-095516.jpg

Related posts:

  1. Proposal #1: Create a National Care Service offering a minimum standard of long term care for all older people
  2. The Social Care Bill is only the start of what we still need to do to reform adult social care and support
  3. Taking a couple of months out from LabourList
  4. Mental health care: The stark reality
  5. The biggest mistake any campaigner can make is taking things personally
  • treborc

    To late for labour, but I do hope that it’s put into law any soldier who is hurt injured or the lost of mind, or of any limbs or in fact PTSD  are  given benefits for as long as they need them.

    And if a soldier learns to walk using his New Legs we are not lining up to tell him he now OK normal and can work.

    Labour record going to war, the leaders ability to make millions off that war, and the disgrace of Brown talking a seriously injured soldier to court for £250,000 then say yes but he gets a pension for life was a disgrace that will stain labour for a long time.

    And we should be looking at Soldiers pay structure we should not have a Military on the  cheap either, if the Police get a wage because of what they face with danger, then soldiers should be paid the same. yes I know we cannot afford it, then actually do not buy missiles that we will never use, and pay the people a decent wage we do us.

  • Daniel Speight

    This is our opportunity to say that Labour will be unflinching when it is necessary to send young people into combat…

    You know what Mark? I would rather they were a bit more ‘flinching’.

    And you know what else? I suspect they would be a bit more ‘flinching’ if their kids were in the military rather than being groomed for a political future.

    • Alan Giles

      I really agree with you here, Daniel. I really think as Blair was so gung-ho, he ought to have encouraged his son Euan to go into the services rather than property speculation. Nothing made me feel more queasy than the sight of Blair, in white open-necked shirt and full make-up, posing in front of groups of soldiers, on one of his publicity stunt photo opportunities in Afghanistan. He reminded you of a camp comedian putting on a show for ENSA

  • Brumanuensis

    Agree with the proposal for a DVA, but I find the rather cult-like adulation of ‘Our Boys’ and the ‘Military Covenant’ to be worrying. I completely agree that soldiers who return from war with physical or mental disabilities deserve all the help they need. But I don’t think society should uncritically valorise the military in the way it does. Soldiers aren’t saints and the way in which sympathy for service personnel is being used to stifle public political opposition to the Afghan War is unhealthy. It breeds a complacency towards the armed forces that could lead to militarism, as the fetishisation of military has done in the US.

    Please don’t get me wrong. I’m not a pacifist, nor am I even particularly ‘dovish’. Relatives of mine have served in all three branches of the armed forces. I just want us to be a bit more cautious about elevating the military to some sort of status above criticism. And to that end, I don’t think we owe an unlimited general obligation towards all members of the armed forces, past or present. We should be more careful than that.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

      I largely agree. The thing is that people who have served in the Forces will benefit from the maintenance of public services – if those services are cut, they will suffer. The two obvious areas where it is detailed that ex-service personnel need help are in procuring decent housing, and mental health services and the associated welfare benefits. All three of those areas are under particular pressure from cuts.

  • Michael Williams

    I was present at the debacle entitled
    ‘Veteran’s Forum’ on Friday 29th June and, I have to say, that it
    was nothing more than a Labour Party Political Broadcast!

    Veteran and Armed Services concerns were
    dealt with at a very late stage into the proceedings with the rest of the event
    been taken up with Labour Party members questions covering such topics as the
    NHS, the current Banking crisis, probity within local government et al – very
    little to do with what I was informed was a Veteran’s Forum.

    As the 15 minute clip on the
    ‘Lincolnite’ website shows, the bulk of this was not aimed at the concerns of
    Veterans, it was aimed at a virtual meet and greet for the Labour Party members
    of Lincoln.  I for one, and I’m sure I’m
    not alone amongst the Veterans, felt this had been shanghaied and we had been
    duped into providing a platform for an MP to grace his followers with the usual
    platitudes!

    When the subject of this event taking
    place came up, I voiced my objections but was assured by such local Labour illumina
    as Lucy Rigby that it would absolutely not be a political production.  Well, I guess you can say that at my age, 56,
    I should never be taken in by the words of a politician……albeit a wannabe!

    By the time I managed to voice my
    question, almost an hour had passed and – with the exception of the question
    immediately preceding mine (not shown but referred to in the clip) – this was
    the first time the subject of the Armed Forces or Veterans welfare had been
    raised.  On declaring who I was, Mr
    Milliband thanked me for allowing him the use of the RNA Club for this
    gathering.  I replied that if it had been
    up to me he, or any other politician, would not have been allowed anywhere near
    the premises.

    As you have probably gathered, I’m no
    Labour supporter, but then again I’m not a supporter of any party who treats
    our Veterans and serving Armed Forces people with the disregard we have seen
    since the end of the First World War.  I
    challenge any government since 1918 to stand up and declare they did their best
    by our Armed Forces and Veterans!  None
    of them dare!

    Many sound-bites are made regarding the
    ‘Military Covenant’ but what is really needed is a UK equivalent of the US GI
    Bill where Veterans are treated with the utmost respect because of what they
    were prepared to sacrifice to maintain the democracy (or lack of it!) which we
    enjoy today!

    Our ex- and serving Military deserve
    much better than they get now…………..you, the public, should not have to put your
    hand in your pocket to contribute to a Service charity so that the correct
    accommodation or rehab centre can be built……………..THAT IS THE REMIT OF EVERY
    GOVERNMENT!

    I will get absolutely slated by my
    Branch for this letter, but I couldn’t let go of the fact that a gathering
    intended to address Veteran’s concerns turned out to be nothing more than a
    Labour Party Political Broadcast!  I
    have, however, been promised by one of Mr Milliband’s cohorts that the Shadow
    Defence Minister will be getting in touch with me.  I don’t swim well underwater so will not be
    holding my breath!

    Shame on you, Lucy Rigby, for
    mis-leading me and shame on Labour for not engaging with those who really are
    looking for answers and help!

    Kindest regards,

    Mike Williams,                                                                                                                                      Hon Secretary,                                                                                                                                     Royal Naval Association,                                                                                                            Lincoln Branch

    • John Dore

      Mike,

      If anyone slates you for telling the truth that is unfair. 

      I’m not familiar with the  GI bill, but I agree we need to do more for our forces and veterans. Our men and women lay down their lives for our way of life at the behest of politicians (it makes me sick that people of such a low standing send such brave people into battle) and we must go the extra mile for them in return. 

      • Michael Williams

        Thank you, John.

    • Brumanuensis

      Mr Williams, as the Lincolnite’s article and the attached video make clear, the session was a Q&A with former and serving members of the Armed Forces about Labour’s policies, not – as you imply – specifically about veterans’ affairs.

      Your concern is well-meant, but inapplicable to the case in question.

      • Michael Williams

        Brumanuensis,

        The Armed Forces declined the offer to attend as they, like the RNA, must remain apolitical. 

        I was never at any point before the event informed that this was about Labour’s policies.  If I had, then I too would have declined to attend!

        I reject your point regarding my concerns being inapplicable.

        • Brumanuensis

          In the Lincolnite’s article, it states:

          ‘Veterans and members of the Armed Forces were able to ask him a number of questions on his policies’.

          So I don’t follow what you mean about the Armed Forces not attending, unless you mean as an organisation. But individual former members did attend evidently. 

          It is unfortunate that you weren’t aware of the exact nature of the event beforehand, but that’s not really the fault of Lincoln Labour Party. There’s no evidence, on the facts, that they have behaved deceitfully.

          • Michael Williams

            Were you present?  If you were, you’d know there was no Regular Armed Forces present.

            I was told it would be on the subject of Armed Forces and Veterans concerns – I was not told it was going to be on Labour policies.

            I put it to you that you are not in possesion of the facts.

          • Brumanuensis

            If you have a problem with what the Lincolnite has printed, take it up with them. At the moment, we have a toss up between your account and another third-party account. I don’t see any evidence, from the video, that other attendees were deeply unhappy with the turn the meeting took. So I’m remaining sceptical.

          • treborc

             getting a bit political, I use my own eyes and ears to what the WCA did to our troops who came back  hurt, to a young soldier being taken to court  by a Labour party, of seeing  soldiers who have no legs learning to walk and being told that’s OK you do not need benefits.

            If the Tories bring in a convent or what ever they want to call it I’m fine with that. if labour wishes to jump on the band wagon I’m fine with that.

            I think we all know Iraq was more about Bush and Blair then Saddam.

          • Michael Williams

            I have already tackled the Lincolnite with regard to the edited content of their submission and await their reply.

            Mine is not a third party account, it is first hand……you were not there apparently yet you sit in judgement.

          • Brumanuensis

            The fact that your account is first-hand, does not mean it is infallible.

          • Michael Williams

            I suspect is is far more accurate than anything you can submit, friend.

            ENDEX!

Latest

  • News More evidence of that slick Downing Street media operation…

    More evidence of that slick Downing Street media operation…

    By Mark Ferguson

    Ed Miliband is addressing Google’s Bug Tent tomorrow, and is expected to attack them over tax avoidance. So the slick Downing Street operation presumably want to get out ahead of that, right? Not quite. Here’s a selection of the headlines from today’s papers: ‘Stop moralising about tax avoidance, PM told’ – Guardian p.23 ‘Tougher tax rules would cost jobs, minister warns’ – Financial Times p.3 ‘Cameron avoids showdown over Google tax row’ – Times p.15 ‘No taxing questions as PM [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Where are the women over 50 on our TV screens?

    Where are the women over 50 on our TV screens?

    By Harriet Harman

    Most people like to think that we live in a society that is fair and equal but for some it is still not equal at all. When it comes to TV presenters, women disappear when they reach over the age of 50. As part of the work of the Older Women’s Commission, I wrote to the six main UK broadcasters asking them how many older women they employ on screen and behind the camera. The figures provided by broadcasters show [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured The Loneliness of the Long Distance Leader

    The Loneliness of the Long Distance Leader

    By Stefan Stern

    That’s it. Enough is enough. I try to be reasonable. But you can only push somebody so far. It’s time to sort this out once and for all. I am fed up with this huge and growing army of sycophants and cheerleaders constantly bigging up Ed Miliband, and making helpful or supportive interventions on his behalf. The list is endless. Let’s shine a spotlight on the guilty men and women. There’s… well, there’s… er… you know… er… thingy… on a [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Europe We do not stigmatise your country, Deputy Prime Minister. It is you and your party we find distasteful

    We do not stigmatise your country, Deputy Prime Minister. It is you and your party we find distasteful

    By Rob Marchant

    Last Saturday a senior European politician wrote an article in the British press which made you want to shout at the computer screen. Not such an unusual event, you might think, but this was not a debater’s disagreement as one might have had with the viewpoint of a Tory, a Gaullist or a Christian Democrat. It was one which also left the reader feeling a bit nauseous. And that is because, rather than an honestly-expressed case justified with some evidence, it was [...]

    Read more →
  • News Watson urges investigation of “supressed” Leveson evidence – Media roundup: May 21st, 2013

    Watson urges investigation of “supressed” Leveson evidence – Media roundup: May 21st, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. Labour proposes teachers spend time in industry “All teachers involved in vocational education would have to spend a period of each year in industry, under Labour plans to integrate further education with emerging skills gaps identified by businesses. The strategy – announced on [...]

    Read more →