Col Richard Kemp: we must fight for fairness for all troops

By Col Richard Kemp, Former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan Published: 12:34PM GMT 04 March 2010

Comments 8 |

Colonel Richard Kemp

The new examination of the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme by Admiral the Lord Boyce, former Chief of the Defence Staff, is an enlivening growth and the supervision should be strongly commended for usurpation all of the recommendations.

Visit the Lives on the Line Facebook page

It has increased income payments by over 35% for those liberated as a outcome of their wounds, majority quite by reflecting the lasting goods of some-more critical injuries and the after early retirement ages that are apropos common, as well as reception comment of expected promotions during a use career right afar cracked by the goods of battle.

Neil Heritage: No remuneration for infantryman harmed in 2003 Former Afghanistan commander in chief accuses ministers over "shameful" remuneration for harmed soldiers Taliban cavern network in Pakistan plateau British infantryman killed at Afghan checkpoint Snatch Land Rover not competent for job, inquisition told MoD "deliberately obstructive" in covering up cost overruns

I would similar to to be means to contend that the intrigue is right afar estimable of the heroes it exists to compensate. But shamefully it does not embody all of those heroes.

The new remuneration intrigue was introduced in approval of the altered resources of 21st Century infantry use in the epoch of the tellurian quarrel on terror. Yet it categorically excludes Service men and women bleeding prior to Apr 2005.

This creates no sense. The quarrel on terror, with Afghanistan and Iraq being the dual majority active theatres to date, began in 2001. That actuality is obviously and certainly recognized by the British Operational Service Medals, awarded to infantry who have fought in these dual theatres since eleven Sep 2001.

So because does the new remuneration intrigue bar those bleeding in the initial 4 years of the conflict? Because the orthodox instrument that enabled the intrigue came in to force in Apr 2005, and, in the difference of Lord Boyces review: Successive governments, opposite all open zone grant and remuneration schemes, have hold the ubiquitous process of creation improvements prospectively with no retrospective element. So far, so hideously bureaucratic.

What this supervision infrequently usually doesnt appear to get is that we direct from the fighting infantry a peculiarity of joining that is indeed exceptional; that stands approach on top of the concept official formulations of ubiquitous policies and retrospective elements - however simply these might outing off the polite use keyboard.

Our forces unfailingly encounter the final we have of them. They risk hold up and limb, thousands of miles away, often in the majority horrific conflict conditions, so that we can live in reserve and security in the joy of the homes. Their compact to us is formed on the core values of unselfish commitment, courage, discipline, integrity, faithfulness and respect.

To them we contingency liberate not usually the authorised obligations, of that the supervision is so proud, but additionally the dignified obligations, that are far some-more severe but but essential. The hallmark of the remuneration we yield for the bleeding should be those same core values, in sold apply oneself and loyalty. Not excuses about all open zone grant and remuneration schemes.

Those bleeding prior to Apr 2005 are lonesome by the War Pensions Scheme that dates behind a little ninety years to the First World War. Whereas Service men and women severely bleeding after 2005 embrace a pile total of up to �570,000 immediately, those bleeding prior to get zero until they are liberated from the Services. Following discharge, both groups embrace income payments, but these are in all larger underneath the new scheme, and most some-more so since the new review.

There are of march most arguments ancillary the 2005 cut-off. But these often revolve around intensity discrepancies prior to and after any begin date in in between non-combat injuries, such as in a trade collision whilst on avocation in the UK. Of march people harmed afar from the terrain contingency be considered, but the intrigue should be formed on top of and over all else on satisfactory and usually diagnosis for those infantry who are bleeding whilst fighting for their country.

Under Lord Boyces review, the supervision has in any box breached the own process of carrying no retrospective elements - by backdating the improvements to remuneration to the begin of the new arrangements in 2005. This backdating is described as exceptional, due to the significance trustworthy to the intrigue by the government. Is it not usually as critical that those bleeding in in between 2001 and 2005 be since well-developed diagnosis too, permitting them to be compensated fairly?

We are not articulate here about opening of floodgates. Those who are reception remuneration underneath the new intrigue already series in the thousands. But according to the governments own figures, usually around 120 Service men and women were severely bleeding in in between Sep 2001 and Apr 2005 - together with Neil Heritage who lost both legs usually five months prior to the new intrigue came in to existence. The cost of treating 120 heroes similar to Sergeant Brennan with the integrity and apply oneself they merit is a little fragment of the check the taxpayer contingency feet this year for RBS bonuses.

Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth, in the Foreword to Lord Boyces review, says that he has been quite endangered that the youngest soldiers who humour hold up becoming different injuries in Afghanistan are scrupulously upheld for the rest of their lives. I extol Mr Ainsworths sentiment, and I know this comes from the heart. But I urge him to magnify his regard to the immature soldiers whose lives were cracked by bombs and bullets prior to as well as after Apr 2005. These dauntless men and women put their lives on the line for us. We contingency quarrel for integrity for them.