Many politicians will have the date of the 7th May etched firmly in mind as this Parliament enters its final days. I think we must not however lose sight of the far more important date of the 8th May - the 70th Anniversary of VE Day. With this in mind we must refocus our efforts to ensure that our veterans receive all the support they deserve to thank them for their brave service.
Tonight, in the final adjournment debate of this Parliament, I will be raising the way that some disabled veterans in the social care system are losing the vast majority of their injury compensation to pay for their care. It’s an issue that goes to the heart of how a society which values its armed forces ought to compensate those who are injured in the field of conflict.
This is an issue which has been promoted excellently by the Royal British Legion. I’ve been proud to work with the Legion both as Chair of the All Party Veterans Group in Parliament and as a supporter of my constituency’s Blackpool branch. There, the efforts of brilliant campaigners like former President Ian Coleman have raised over £130,000 for local veterans over the last twenty-five years. This laudable work provides extra support for veterans who need it, but those same veterans should not be left in unjust financial circumstances in the first place, particularly not by the Government’s hand.
Those who were injured serving in the Armed Forces before 2005, spanning conflicts from World War II to Korea, to the Falklands and Afghanistan, receive compensation from what is called the War Pension for the pain and loss of life quality caused by their disablement. This is money put aside to show our thanks for the bravery and sacrifice of our Armed Forces, not to pay for care or adaptability aids.
Yet when those same veterans enter the social care system, they may retain only £10 of their compensation once their care costs are paid. This is in stark contrast to the way that veterans injured more recently are treated. Those who were injured after April 2005 get to keep all of their injury compensation when the cost of their care is calculated. It’s in contrast to civilians who keep all of their personal injury compensation. And it’s in contrast to how Government treats those on the War Pension in other areas. The compensation payments are disregarded when Universal Credit is being calculated, or Housing Benefit, or Council Tax.
The average War Pension recipient might lose £70 a week and for some with the most serious injuries the loss can be hundreds of pounds. The effects are devastating. Keith Clarke, who is 43 years old, was left paraplegic while attempting to put out a fire on his submarine. Keith loses £100 of his compensation every week to meet the cost of his care worker, who visits daily to help him dress and look after his two children, one of whom is also disabled. He told the Daily Telegraph, ‘I feel angry and frustrated. It’s definitely an injustice, to be treated as a second-class citizen.’
Fred Cannon fought on the Gold Beach Normandy when he was 19 years old. He was the only survivor and the only member of his company to come home. A serious bullet wound left him with one leg shorter than the other, which, now in his 90s, leads to a number of painful trips and falls. Like too many others though, he is now left with only £10 a week compensation for the injuries he received fighting in the deadliest circumstances during Britain’s darkest hour.
My colleagues in the Shadow Defence Team have committed that under a Labour Government we would review the compensation schemes to see how they can be improved. We’ve raised concerns about the level of engagement and progress the Coalition has made working with veterans on this issue, and I will be pushing Ministers on this tonight.
What we have also pledged is to carefully consider every policy which affects veterans through the prism of the Armed Forces Covenant, a cross-party initiative which I was proud to support but which seems unfulfilled in cases where veterans are left only £10 a week to compensate for debilitating injuries. A key principle of the Covenant is that an individual is left at ‘no disadvantage’ for having served in the Forces. Yet when serious injury is incurred, yet veterans are left to navigate difficult years in the social care system with hardly any recompense for the pain and suffering involved, we can hardly consider ourselves to be meeting that principle.
Keith Clarke, the submariner who was left paraplegic following a fire, went on to say, ‘The military covenant is not worth the piece of paper it’s written on, because the Government and local councils don’t honour it.’ We owe it to Keith, and to the 100,000 other veterans who could lose their compensation, to make sure all our social services reflect our pride at the bravery and sacrifice of our Armed Forces.
Gordon Marsden MP is Chair of the All Party Group on Veterans