Every year, hundreds of people are injured in the British military. That’s always going to be one of the risks of training a body of people to potentially fight against others.
And those joining the military know those risks. It’s part of the job.
But military folk also expect to be supported when things go wrong. Such “harm” from service could be a wound on operations, injury on training, or harm elsewhere in their service life (e.g., assault, disease, bullying, and many more reasons).
Supporting those who are harmed includes medical treatment, psychological therapy, counselling, physio, occupational therapy, or changing jobs to better match new abilities. Some will go to hospital and/or Stanmore Hall (or its previous incantation at Headley Court).
I hope that many (most?) people in the UK hope such personnel and veterans will be well looked after.
Most politicians want to present themselves as supporting our military and veterans. Over the last year, many claims have been made in parliament about improvements in veteran-related services.
And, when viewed as a whole, things have probably improved for veterans. At least, there is a considerable amount more talking about and awareness of veteran-related matters, rather than just the old “mad, bad and sad” cliche.
And this is where the question of “compensation”, benefits and pensions is so interesting. Do we have confidence that the systems in place are doing what Parliament intended? Is there data available that demonstrates this?
Data
The public does not know how well the Ministry of Defence is doing regarding processing claims under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme and War Pension Scheme.
The published data, whilst extensive, lacks the detail (the “granularity”) upon which accurate findings and recommendations can be made.
We can look at the published annual statistics and see that, between 2016/17 and 2022/23:
- AFCS initial claims take 72% longer to process (n.101 to n.174 working days)
- AFCS reconsiderations are 34% quicker (n.143 to n.94 working days)
- AFCS appeals take 13% longer (n.364 to n.412 working days)
But we can’t take those figures on their own. We need to consider the number of applications, the impact of Covid, the support provided by service charities and law firms, and the decisions' accuracy.
A critical matter is the funding allocated to processing such claims. The MOD department managing these claims, Defence Business Services (DBS) - Veterans UK, has limited resources.
The amount spent on Full Time Equivalent (FTE) DBS staff working on the delivery of Veterans services increased by 3.56% between 2016/17 and 2022/23 (see parliament written answer, 18 Nov 2022).
Over that same period, CPI increased 27.5% (CPI data: April 2016: 100.6; April 2023: 128.3), and the total defence budget increased 33% (£35.3 billion to £47 billion).
At the same time, there were 10,000 fewer War Pension recipients (saving £), but over 21,000 individuals submitted AFCS claims (additional £).
So why did the veteran-related budget increase so little? We just don’t know. Has it put additional pressure on Veterans UK? Undoubtedly so.
The future
This project wants people:
- To know about AFCS and War Pension law
- To understand the processes involved
- To see what today’s data can show us
- To highlight data not recorded but needs to be
We are striving to help create a better compensation/benefit/insurance system for those harmed in the military. Our core team has lived experiences of military service, harm, and dealing with the AFCS and War Pension schemes.
We work with policymakers, academics, charities, journalists – and anyone else interested in veterans and improving how we support those who serve and have served our nation.
Together, we can help drive change and make the system fairer. We'd love you to join us on that journey. If you like the sound of what we are doing, please feel free to share this post.
