Peter Hitchens - Mail on Sunday

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jack-daniels, Jul 1, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Maybe I got him thinking about it after I bought up the point on Question Time the other week, it's in his column today that he tried to get the numbers of service personnel who have lost limbs, been blinded, deafened or paralysed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was told the MoD does not hold such information and gave various excuses. He has now applied for the information from the Freedom of Information Act.
  2. The MOD doesn't hod such information? Well who the feck does then?
  3. Assembling that data entirely free from the M.O.D. might just be a project for which ARRSE itself might be best suited.
    F'uck officialdom. Why not a case of soldiers doing it for themselves?
  4. fcuk off, bolshy.
  5. Well, so how far does un bolshy get you?
  6. jack-daniels

    He was told the MoD does not hold such information and gave various excuses

    Maybe they think if they dont keep these stats well then its not really happening and everythings going to be ok!
  7. Really...So what happens to those hordes of persreps we have to fill in what seems like every 5 minutes.....?

    Me smells a lie. Shame an MP didn't ask that question. Could have been a bit more fun watching brooone squeal and squirm. Could someone ask Mark Lancaster to ask the question perhaps...?
  8. I don't believe that they do not know, they have stats on everything. I have recently asked a couple of questions and had the figures provided to me. You would think that the number of soldiers that had been badly injured and their type of injury would rate high on their list of stats.
  9. I saw a minister questioned about this on tv. I think it was Reid, on Newsnight, but I could be wrong as it was a while ago. He refused to give a figure, saying that it was difficult to define what was meant by the term 'wounded'.

    I can't remember his exact words now, but it was along the lines of 'who do you count?' - depending on whether someone was injured as a result of direct enemy action, as opposed to falling off a 4 tonner etc. Also, it depended on who did the casevacing,(our blokes, the Canadians, the Yanks and so on) which nation actually treated them back at base, and where they were evacuated to when they left the country. His basic thrust was that, conveniently, figures aren't collated because of the difficulty in collecting the data, and anyway, everyone, including the MOD, are much too busy making sure the injured party gets the very best attention along the way etc, etc, etc. Complete horse sh*t, really.

    I'm not sure if this is still the case, but it would not surprise me if it is. What would surprise me, would be if they had taken steps to rectify the situation, given the political inconvenience of the public finding out what the true cost is. For a govt and civil service which is normally obsessed with statistics and bean counting, not knowing the number of casualties suffered by your own forces in war fighting stretches credulity somewhat.

    I can't imagine that it would be very difficult to find out, if they wanted to. All they've got to do is ask the units actually involved in active operations. They know how many blokes they went with, and how many came back, and what happened in between.

    Straightforward, I would have thought. Not really a job for Hercule Poirot, is it?.
  10. , holds what seems to be accurate data so if the states can do it why cant the MoD.
    Makes grim reading.
  11. Jackey Dee has got a PM. Shhssshhhh
  12. You are mistaking him for his brother.....
  13. This is interesting because if your are medically discharged, the pension would come out of the Defence Budget.

    War Pensions come out of the public purse.

    Each of these departments are or should be aware of how much they are actually paying to veterans, and what for. Therefore, one of these agencies hold most of the information that you require.

    However, l personally feel that it is all smoke and mirrors between the Veterans Agency, and the MOD because all Service Personal if they are medically discharged it will be under QR95/PARA 9.387 (ceasing to fulfil Army Medical Standards), this is the same for Royal Air Force & Navy.

    The knock on affect of this, is that some slimy person (Defence Minister or Veteran Minister - depending which day of the week, it is with NEW LABOUR - NO SHAME), can and will, whilst keeping a straight face, in the Houses of Parliament/Press that there is NO actual breakdown of wounds and injuries that have led to these soldiers being medically discharged.

    The other knock on affect is, the medically discharged person has the ONUS (well and truly) placed on him/her to notify the Veterans Agency of just what wounds/injuries lead to them being actually discharged; regardless of your medical documentation being supplied to the Veterans Agency; apparently, the literacy skills at this Agency don't have to be that GOOD!!!!!! Otherwise, they wouldn't keep asking you to supply the same information, that is inside your folder, lying on their desk, when they are requesting it.................Remember the words, ONUS is on YOU - NOT them!

    lf anyone should have the STATS for the Armed Forces, that have been medically discharged for wounds/injuries, it will be the Veterans Agency -IF, and its a BIG IF, that soldier has claimed a War Pension.

    Fact: Of the 53,500 Troops deployed to the Gulf War 1990/91, there are now close too, 7000 who have recieved a payment or are in receipt of a War Pension for illness/injury relating to their preparation to deploy or active service in the Gulf (SPVA - Service Personal Veterans Agency, formerly known as VA - Veterans Agency ), 2007.

    lf some - one was to approach the Service Personal Veterans Agency (SPVA), and request under the 'Freedom of Information Act' (F.O.I.A) for the actual breakdown of War Pensions issued from 2003. You have to be specific in your wording of the question being asked, and how you are asking it, it is all in the wording.

    That is how MPs and PMs, have always avoided actually answering YOUR question/s.
  14. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    [carrier wave]