Proceeding contribution from Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 29 March 2010. It occurred during Question for short debate on Gulf War: Veterans.
Gulf War: Veterans
My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Morris, on obtaining this debate, and I apologise for my momentary absence at the beginning. The noble Lord, Lord Morris, has been a fine champion of the Armed Forces and a real force for good in their interest. He and I co-chaired a well attended meeting in the Robing Room in March last year, when we were privileged to hear at first hand from the chairman and members of the Research Advisory Committee set up by the United States Congress to examine scientifically the issues of Gulf War illness and the present and future health of affected Gulf War veterans. Under the inspired leadership of Colonel Binns, this committee of experts established beyond peradventure why so many US and UK service personnel who fought in Gulf War I returned with unexplainable illnesses. That work did much to shed a clear, bright, penetrating light on these issues. When I spoke at that gathering, I had hoped to note and welcome the presence of representatives from the Ministry of Defence, but it seemed that invitations had regrettably arrived too late for any Minister. However, it should still have been possible for one or more officials to attend on Ministers’ behalf. That would have helped underline Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s personal and explicit promise to treat fairly those who had been prepared to put their lives on the line, as directed by their Government, and who have suffered as a result. We should never forget that we are concerned about the care and fair treatment of individuals whose illnesses were triggered almost 20 years ago. At various times in the course of this long period attempts have been concentrated on reaching conclusions and closure. It is in no one’s interest that it still drags on, causing difficulties on all sides, confrontation and disillusionment rather than co-operation and satisfaction. In spite of efforts over the years by this Government going back to when they first entered office in 1997, the unfortunate impression has been left with Gulf veterans and their families that while the Government may be fulsome with their praises for veterans, they are unwilling or unable to give greater practical help to those who suffer. The Government’s claim is that all who have a recognised incapacity or illness are compensated, but this does not seem to reach over satisfactorily to the many individuals who are clearly unwell but do not have a classified condition of illness. The fine work of the Research Advisory Committee opens a new door on these poorly defined conditions, so it was a bitter blow when the Government’s reaction to the RAC report was to inform this House that, although they had examined the report following its publication on 17 November 2008 because the United States Department of Veterans Affairs had sent the report to the highly respected Institute of Medicine (IoM) for review, Her Majesty’s Government would await the outcome of this process before reaching any conclusions on the report. The noble Baroness, Lady Taylor, wrote a letter to me dated 20 May 2009. A copy of the letter is also in the Library. It states: "““The IOM are committed to updating their 2006 report by reviewing newly published research and taking into account the Report submitted by James Binns as chair of the Research Advisory Council””." But has any such reference taken place? Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Morris, has dealt with that point. The information that I, too, had from Colonel Binns months ago was that no such reference would take place. Has there been any further statement or action on the RAC report from the Government that I may have missed? It seems extraordinary that it takes a further Question for debate in your Lordships' House to get further comment or commitment from the Government even after their deadline of February 2010 had passed. Surely, this is not the sort of treatment that ill veterans should bear. I finish by quoting from the executive conclusions of the Research Advisory Committee’s report. It is a very heavy and thick report, so I have reproduced it in my notes. It states: "““The extensive body of scientific research now available consistently indicates that Gulf War Illness is real, that it is the result of neuro-toxic exposures during Gulf War deployment, and that few veterans have recovered or substantially improved with time. Addressing the persistent health problems affecting Gulf War veterans remains the obligation of government, and all who are indebted to the military men and women who risked their lives in Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia 17 [now 19] years ago. This obligation is made more urgent by the length of time that Veterans have waited for answers and assistance””." Does that not say it all? I hope that we hear some good news from the Minister when he replies.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 718 c474-5GC
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Compensation Chemical weapons Health hazards Iraq-Kuwait conflict Preventive medicine Research Vaccination War pensions USA Gulf War syndrome Organophosphates Pyridostigmine bromide US Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses US Institute of Medicine Veterans Sarin
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 01:52:03 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634833
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634833
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634833