---

Armed Forces Personnel

That was certainly what he appeared to me to be saying. I rather thought that the Secretary of State for Defence had more or less acknowledged that. I am astounded to hear the Minister demur from a sedentary position. I am disappointed; I thought that Members on both sides of the House agreed on that. Perhaps Ministers have not listened to the advice of General Dannatt. We have to do more to retain our good men and women and to encourage more to enrol. Soldiers, especially those joining up as privates or lance-corporals, are still on comparatively low wages—notwithstanding the improvements to which the Minister referred—particularly when one looks at the demands being placed on them. When one measures the levels of pay per hour worked, one sees that many soldiers’ salaries are below even the national minimum wage. Even when one adds the X-factor to compensate for the extra demands upon them, there seems to be little comfort. The Defence White Paper of 1999 stated:"““People give us the critical edge that leads to success””" and went to talk about the need to"““look after people properly and make sure that they are highly motivated.””" We have to listen to the warnings that we are getting from our armed servicemen and ensure that we do more to meet that objective. One of the most significant issues in human terms that we still face—this has been touched on at some length by others—is that of mental health. I welcome reports that the Government seem to be waking up to the fact that the psychological wounds of war are just as serious as the physical wounds and are beginning to include more measures to provide mental health care. That is absolutely necessary, but we cannot just pay lip service to such a significant consequence of war. It is not easy to reconcile the many disturbing and difficult experiences of being in a conflict zone with the normality of everyday life back home. We have to work to make the transition easier. The main obstacle for some personnel is admitting that things are not right and that they are unhappy, depressed or in distress; we must make this hurdle easier to cross. As the hon. Member for Woodspring (Dr. Fox) said, we have to tackle the problem at the core, which is the stigma throughout our society—this is not unique to the armed forces—that attaches to mental health problems. I do not think that the military ethos makes that any easier to deal with in the military context. Already, personnel from Iraq and Afghanistan are being referred, with more than 1,000 service personnel receiving treatment from the Priory in the past three and a half years. I imagine that it will take some years yet until the full scale of these hidden wounds become apparent. I see from a written answer yesterday that, so far, 21 members of the armed forces have committed suicide after operating in Iraq between 2003 and 2006. Reference has been made to the work of Combat Stress, and I endorse the words of others about the excellent work it does and has been doing for a very long time. The expertise that it has worked up in this field should not be underestimated, but Combat Stress is now facing a financial crisis. In future, the Ministry wants it to undertake its work on the basis of individual contracts and referrals. If Combat Stress is to be left with the task of developing bureaucratic systems to cope, it will end up needing a large administration than the totality of what it has at present just to process the paperwork and the bureaucracy. It is vital that Combat Stress continues in the future as it has in the past to perform its role on the basis of one block contract. I urge the Government to engage with Combat Stress and to make sure that that is possible. The hon. Member for Woodspring urged the Minister to take note of work going on in America on brain injuries. I urge the Minister to take more heed of work going on in America on Gulf war syndrome and, most specifically, toxicology work that appears to put some of the problems down to events at the very beginning of the Gulf war conflict, when some of the attacks on enemy weapons and armaments locations may have released into the atmosphere substances that may have in no small part contributed to the problems that followed. I hope that the MoD is in full contact with the American authorities on this and will take heed of that work. As well as mental health, we have often highlighted in these debates the need to ensure that our troops are cared for in the general medical sense and that they receive the specialist attention they deserve. In theatre and in the immediate aftermath, some of the medical care available is of an enormously high standard, but Members on both sides understand that it is over the longer term and after the initial treatment has been given that things can be found lacking. The Minister said that the service being offered to troops in Afghanistan should not be measured simply in terms of the time it is taking to get people to a hospital. I understand that, but, as the hon. Member for Westbury (Dr. Murrison) said, the critique offered last weekend came from someone very well placed to make it. I hope to see Ministers attending to the detail of some of the points that were made. Among those is the ongoing problem that we always reach in these debates: the lack of helicopter capacity. In the hostile terrain of Afghanistan, helicopters are indispensable and invaluable, both in conflict and medical situations. The Americans have dedicated medical helicopters and, although we cannot match the capabilities of the Americans, we need to consider how we can prioritise and improve the cover that we give to medical and military services. Helicopters remain a very high priority. There are still persistent complaints about the standard, quality and availability of essential equipment. A report in The Daily Telegraph last week suggested that in Afghanistan, 50 per cent. of Apache helicopters are not working and only 70 per cent. of Chinooks are available, with no air assaults having taken place since the Paras left last year. There are indications, which the Minister denied in respect of the month of May, that flying hours are being used up before the end of the month and that we lack the spare parts needed for essential repairs to keep the helicopters flying. This is a big obstacle to the success of our mission in Afghanistan. We have talked about the problem of British soldiers being killed in Iraq in ““snatch”” Land Rovers. I am disappointed by the vagueness of parliamentary answers to me and others about when more robust vehicles will reach the front line. I hope that we can have some reassurance on that. How can we expect our personnel to do their best and achieve success in difficult and enduring conflicts when we are not providing them with the necessary equipment to do the job? Inevitably, housing has been referred to today. There is still far too much substandard housing. Whatever might be said about the deal with Annington Homes in 1996, the fact remains that that was 11 years ago. There has been plenty of opportunity to make some serious investment in the housing estate over the past 11 years, but not enough has been done. The Public Accounts Committee noted recently that many people are leaving the service on account of the ““appalling”” state of accommodation. Vice Admiral Tim Laurence said:"““The standard of accommodation has played a significant role in the recruitment and retention of personnel.””" In addition to the problems of housing while they are in the services, there is also the problem, when people leave the service, of finding suitable and affordable accommodation in their local areas. I welcome what has been said today about addressing the local connection anomaly. That certainly should help, but it will gain only a certain number of points within the housing allocation system. My hon. Friend the Member for Colchester (Bob Russell) is normally with us on these occasions, but I know that he is sorry that he cannot be here because his participation in the armed forces parliamentary scheme means that he is out on Salisbury plain today. Were he here, he would undoubtedly wish to pipe up on the subject of education for service families, because in Colchester the Alderman Blaxill school, which has been serving military families and children coming out of the garrison for 50 years—and which the Defence Committee visited last year, and where, unusually, it held a formal sitting—is now, astonishingly, threatened with closure. I very much hope that the Ministry of Defence will make contact with colleagues at the Department for Education and Skills and with the local education authority. I am well aware that there are falling school rolls, among not only schools serving military families but across the board. I deplore the fact that many of these schools have had far too many pupils in them for far too long, and just as the opportunity presents itself to have schools of a smaller size and a more human scale, with a far more family atmosphere—which is particularly necessary where they are serving a lot of military children—they are threatened with closure. It would be a much better idea to allow the schools to continue with smaller numbers, rather than feeling obliged to close them and herd the children into larger schools. Before leaving the subject of education, I urge Ministers to take seriously the best possible deployment of ICT—modern technology—to provide continuity in the education of children who are required to change school when their parents are posted. If they could take with them more educational records of achievement, and take coursework with them as part of a universal ICT programme, it would surely make their transition from one school to another all the more effective. Ultimately, all these issues feed into the well-being of our forces, and that contributes to the success of our missions and the morale of the troops. The military covenant refers to morale. It says:"““The effectiveness of the team depends on every individual, seen or unseen, playing their part to the full, and contributing to the cohesion of the whole. Success in such conditions depends above all on good morale which is the spirit that enables soldiers to triumph over adversity. High morale is the basis for the moral superiority and dominance required for success on operations and triumph in battle.””" Those words should be ringing in all our ears, and should ring in the ears of the Ministry of Defence. Based on that definition, I think that a great deal more needs to be done to reinforce, improve and enhance morale. Our men and women are doing a difficult and challenging job, often in very difficult conditions, in these two major conflicts, and so far I do not think that we are doing enough to meet their basic needs, and to fulfil the duty of care that is owed to them.