Proceeding contribution from John Baron (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 10 January 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Armed Forces Personnel.
Armed Forces Personnel
The hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) made a number of interesting points, particularly those relating to super-garrisons. I hope that the Minister will at least investigate that matter further. I welcome this debate. It does not take me to suggest that Parliament has a special duty to look after service personnel and to honour the military covenant. That duty is born of the fact that Parliament, on behalf of the nation, has a moral duty to repay the dedication shown by our service personnel. In addition, because politicians ultimately decide on deployment, and as there is an absence of a union or any other representative organisation, Parliament has a direct role to play in the welfare of our service personnel. Despite that special duty, there is mounting evidence to suggest that this Government risk failing our service personnel. Poor housing is perhaps a key example of that. Various statistics have been bandied about in this short debate. We have heard about the Public Accounts Committee's suggestion that nearly half of all service accommodation is substandard. I think I am right in saying that a Select Committee on Defence report suggested that some accommodation was appalling. The Army's own continuous attitude surveys suggest that half our troops believe that the maintenance of their accommodation is not what it should be, and senior figures have added their voice on this matter. General Sir Michael Rose has said:"““The situation has become so extreme that it is driving soldiers out of the Army in increasing numbers.””" It seems to me that the Government have forgotten the old first world war concept of ““homes for heroes”” when it comes to our troops. In fairness, their single living accommodation modernisation—SLAM—initiative has resulted in some additional funding, but the Public Accounts Committee made it clear that even at the current rate of improvement it would take 20 years for all the accommodation to be removed from the substandard category. As if to illustrate the point, I raised the issue of the accommodation at the Hounslow cavalry barracks with the Defence Secretary. The 2nd battalion of my regiment, the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, will be returning there from overseas deployment in the spring. The Minister will be aware that that accommodation was condemned in the 1960s, and that it has a reputation in the armed forces of being probably the worst accommodation. Most of the troops' accommodation will be about 250 ft below the Heathrow flight path. The senior non-commissioned officers' accommodation is the worst of all—the rooms are so narrow and small that one must close one's door before one can open one's locker. I welcome the Defence Secretary's apparent acceptance of an invitation to visit the Hounslow cavalry barracks, because they are worthy of a visit. Although funds are being put into those barracks, by most accounts they are insufficient to deal with the deficiencies.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 470 c606-7
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Armed forces Casualties Housing Education Iraq Pay Recruitment Staff Social security benefits Training Afghanistan Blood transfusions
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 23:32:09 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_433481
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_433481
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_433481