Veterans (Hansard, 26 February 1991)

§ Mr. George Howarth (Knowsley, North)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish a Department of Veterans' Affairs with responsibility for resettlement of veterans, care and rehabilitation of disabled veterans, support for veterans' families, and related matters; and for connected purposes. The Bill—which is supported by the Royal British Legion, the Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen's Families Association and several other ex-service organisations—also enjoys wide support in the House, as I hope to demonstrate when I give the names of its sponsors.

I pay tribute to the Royal British Legion and other organisations for their work on behalf of veterans. The Bill's purpose is to help that work by making the Government more accountable in the way in which it deals with the concerns of veterans. Currently, some 18 million veterans and their dependants are in this country; compared to those in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other countries, only a small proportion have any special status in terms of either pension provision or specialised welfare services. Responsibility for dealing with the needs of veterans lies with 16 different Government Departments: most right-minded people would agree that that is a recipe for red tape and confusion, which indeed result from the present system.

The scope and nature of the problems caused to individuals can be illustrated by the case of Corporal Blackburn, which has been raised before in the House. Corporal Blackburn is a young soldier who was injured in service and consequently became paralysed, which necessitated long hospitalisation and confinement to a wheelchair for life. Quite apart from his disabilities, which were traumatic enough in themselves, the man had to cope almost entirely on his own with resettlement and rehabilitation. Paradoxically, there was no Ministry of Defence social worker in the military hospital to which he was confined, although such a facility was available to NHS intake patients.

Corporal Blackburn eventually managed to leave hospital, but his departure was delayed because of the problem of finding accommodation that had been suitably adapted for his severe disablement. The whole process of 808 rehabilitation involved several agencies and Government Departments, and, while that would have been difficult enough for an able-bodied person to deal with, it was much more of a problem for someone who was virtually paralysed and trying to come to terms with his condition. The corporal was single; had he been married, that might have solved some of the problems, but it would obviously have created many others.

Corporal Blackburn has spent some two and a half years trying to get his problems solved, and they are not all solved yet. That case highlights the difficulties that many people experience.

The Bill seeks to streamline the service and the support given in such a way as to minimise the stress and hardship that confront ex-service personnel and their families, particularly in cases such as that of Corporal Blackburn. It will ensure that they receive all the help with resettlement, care and rehabilitation, and all the support for their families, that is necessary. It will also co-ordinate responses, which at present are scattered and confusing.

Soon we shall have a new generation of veterans, as service people return from the Gulf—people who joined the services and, lately, have fought for the United Nations resolutions and other Gulf causes, and who carry out the tough and often bloody work that is necessary from time to time. During such conflicts, however, our support should not be confined to fine words. We must also turn our minds to setting up a system that will help such people to adjust to leading lives that are as normal as possible. So far, we have failed in that task; the Bill provides a framework within which we can remedy that failure and recognise our responsibilities.