A drug policy out of step with the times?
Three years ago, in PoliticsHome, CEO of Veterans Aid Professor Hugh Milroy warned about the legacy of distress the charity was dealing with due to drug-related outflow from HM Armed Forces. Two years later it was revealed that the discharge of large numbers of service personnel due to drug abuse was continuing unabated – approximately 4,000 between 2018 and 2022. In the wake of several distressing cases at Veterans Aid Prof Milroy is urging policymakers to revisit the wide-ranging consequences of 'zero tolerance' dismissals.
Like it or not, recreational drug use is widespread. In the year ending March 2023 (according to the ONS), an estimated 9.5% of the UK population, aged between 16 and 59 years (approximately 3.1 million people) reported using a drug in the last 12 months; 7.6% reported using cannabis (around 2.5 million people) and 3.3% reported using a Class A drug (around 1.1 million people).
If there was a quick fix to the UK's drug problems, it would surely be in place by now. Against this background, and other significant factors that I shall identify, perhaps it's time for the Armed Forces to take a different approach?
I'm not suggesting that we simply roll over and accept the unacceptable. Moreover, I am not condoning the use of so-called 'recreational' drugs in a military setting; but I do believe that, with regard to the Armed Forces, we should think of less draconian ways of dealing with drug use than simply throwing someone out of the door without regard to the consequences.
'Zero tolerance' makes for a good soundbite, but it isn't nuanced enough to reflect contextual realities. Indeed, it only begs bigger questions, such as whether there is a comprehensive strategy in place to deal with the drug issue? For example, have the Service police been given the resources to break supply chains? If not, why not? Are military authorities working in local partnerships with police, local authorities, the NHS, substance misuse agencies and mental health treatment agencies to combat the issue on a grander scale? If any of this is happening, how is it co-ordinated - and what measures are in place to help the fiscally valuable assets that are our soldiers, sailors, and airmen, rather than simply dumping them?
Are we so resistant to the idea of reform that a structured help system for drug abusers appears to have no place in today's Armed Forces? (Anecdotally, the only reaction I had to my previous article on this subject was from a former military officer who was, in essence 'Very unhappy' about any suggestion that ‘druggies' (his word) in the Armed Forces should be supported in some way. Interestingly, he did not talk about alcohol use/abuse within the Services!)
Latest figures indicate that the total strength of the UK's Armed Forces decreased between 1 January 2023 and 1 January 2024 by 3.7 per cent - i.e. by 7,040 personnel. Against the background of conflict in Ukraine, defence cuts, global unrest and economic hardship, this country's ability to support NATO allies - or even defend itself - is being seriously questioned. I accept that 'boots on the ground' are no longer the only measure of a nation's defence capability but, as a veteran myself, I know that boots there must be!
Combat effectiveness and moral judgements aside, the sheer cost of the current drugs policy - and its wider financial implications - should be examined. For example, the cost of training an infantry soldier in the British Army is estimated to be around £67,400. As the saying goes - "Do the maths!"
When defence budgets are very tight, can the nation really afford to throw this investment away? I suspect that if those actioning these discharges were personally financially responsible, the policy would change.
Let's look at the context.
Policy: "The MOD’s policy states that, "Personnel who misuse drugs can expect to be removed from the Services by disciplinary or administrative means except in exceptional circumstances . . ." In essence, it encompasses a three-pronged approach, Prevent, Deter and Regulate through discipline. Surely, given the numbers involved, it's time to incorporate a 'Remediate' element?
Numbers: Although the exact numbers of Compulsory Drug Testing (CDT) failures are not routinely published, data available through Freedom of Information requests and research papers suggest that between 600 and 770 serving personnel (across the services) return a positive CDT result each year. Under current guidelines, most would be dismissed as a result.
Impact: Thousands of individuals are having their military careers cut short with little notice and no preparation for life outside the Services. At a stroke they lose their accommodation, peer support group and income. To many - typically the young - their Service friends and mentors are fictive kin; often they have no welcoming family unit to return to. Those with families of their own, who are totally reliant upon them, bear an even bigger burden. And the impact on the Services is equally dismal. The loss of - often fully trained - personnel, at a time when the UK's Armed Forces have shrunk to alarmingly small numbers, is both wasteful and alarming. In the Defence debate on 18th November 2024 Secretary of State John Healey admitted that, over the past year, service morale had fallen to record lows, with over 300 more full-time personnel leaving the Armed Forces than joining each month.
Outcome: The social outcome is inestimable and charities like Veterans Aid are being left to pick up the pieces - in financial terms and in the cost of human misery. Summary and unexpected severance from an individual's economic and social support structure is hard for the most robust in society. And it's only the beginning. The downward spiral that follows leads to unemployment, family break up, homelessness, drug/alcohol abuse, crime, imprisonment and mental health problems. Instead of tackling the issue at source, the Armed Forces policy simply shifts it to wider society, leaving it to organisations like VA to pay for their actions.
If major 21st Century organisations such as TFL (DAATS) can see the economic sense of giving employees help to overcome substance misuse, why are our Armed Forces, who are clearly struggling with recruitment and retention, not equally enlightened? After all, people make mistakes!
I suspect that some readers will regard this as scaremongering and exaggeration. So, once again, let's look at the context - with reference to just three of the former soldiers who sought help from Veterans Aid. Our Head of Addictions at VA, Phil Rogers, says, “For the most part we aren’t talking about hardened addicts, so this policy seems incredibly harsh. The illustrations below are typical:
“The first was referred to us by his Unit Welfare Officer after he failed a CDT. He had grown up in foster care, and although he’d used drugs and alcohol as an adolescent, he saw the Army as an opportunity to make a fresh start and acquire a positive ‘family unit.’ Backsliding cost him dearly as he had no home to return to on discharge and was presented to us as homeless.
"The second was originally from Fiji. Discharged from the Army after three years’ service, following a CDT failure, he wants to remain in the UK but has not served long enough to apply for settlement under the Armed Forces rule. He has a six-week-old baby (British), and his wife is in the UK on a dependant's visa. This veteran remains in limbo, pending a decision from the Home Office. In the interim, the same department's rules preclude him from working, applying for housing, or claiming benefits.
"The third case I offer relates to a soldier who had served for 15 years only to be discharged following a CDT failure. Denied help while serving, his drug problems were only compounded by post-service unemployment and unsurprisingly progressed into full blown addiction. After he reached out to Veterans Aid for help to address his issues he was assessed and duly supported through residential rehab. He is presently two months ‘clean’ and committed to staying so."
All those who find their way to Veterans Aid are helped and supported back into sustainable independent living - but it is a long and costly process. It's not new; we have always seen clients arrive at our door following a CDT failure, but we are concerned that the lack of any strategy to deal with this issue could become a significant problem for military charities. Previously, Early Service Leavers and CDT failures had access to SPACES (Single Persons Accommodation Centre for the Ex Services) in Catterick, but its inexplicable - and in my view, unhelpful - closure has left a provision gap. As a result, our Ops Team now has to field calls from Unit Welfare Officers across the country, desperately scrambling to find a solution to the crisis they’ve been landed with.
In 2023 I was quoted in the national press as saying: "I fully understand the operational implications of drug use – but it is a fact of life". One solution might be to create a formal 'Hands up for help' system rather than initiate instant discharge. Or even a second chance process? But there needs to be a long-term strategic plan in place to tackle the wider drugs issue relating to the Armed Forces rather than just short-term admin fixes. Sitting like King Canute on the seashore will not stop the waves advancing and will have, as costs of addiction treatment rises, an unintended but very real financial impact on organisations such as VA!
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
