---

Medals (Armed Forces Personnel)

I shall refer to the purple heart later. Anyone who has met American veterans will know that they are proud to have the purple heart, perhaps more so than some campaign medals. Purple heart veterans can even indicate it on their vehicle licence plate, but I am not sure that we should go to such extremes. The principle of awarding the medal is more important than the details of how it would be awarded. Some, including the former Minister for the Armed Forces, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Mr. Ingram), have said that the medal should be extended to people other than those who have been wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am sympathetic to such a proposal. There has been some concern about what to call the medal. Some have suggested that it should be called the Elizabeth cross or Elizabeth medal. I understand that ““cross”” tends to be associated with gallantry, so ““medal”” would perhaps be more appropriate. I have noted that the star shape is not in use in today's military, so we could call the medal the Elizabeth star. Again, those details could be worked out once the principle had been agreed. Some have put forward reasons why such a medal should not be awarded, and it is important to expose them to a little critical thinking. I have heard that the Ministry of Defence supports a medal for the dead but not for the wounded. That would be a great mistake. There is a lot of support in the service community for recognition for those who are wounded, and to divide them from comrades who lost their lives would be an error—it would leave a lot of armed forces personnel feeling that the measure was half-hearted. I urge the Minister not to go down that path when he speaks to his officials.