OVERSTRETCH AND RECRUITMENT IN THE ARMED FORCES

Published in Conference Monitor on Sat 13th Sep 2008

Theme: If the armed forces continue suffering from over stretch, then what can be done to encourage more people to join the armed forces?

A recent tri-service survey showed that nearly half of British troops consider leaving the forces on a regular basis as a result of equipment shortages, low pay and poor morale, and it is perhaps not hard to see why: two sustained commitments in hostile theatres, long working hours, high risk levels, extended and frequent overseas tours, coupled with a growing list of problems with housing, medical care, support and post-service assistance, the current nature of service life hardly serves as a good advertisement for why you should serve your country.

Our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan has taken its toll on our Armed Forces and we are at a point of critical overstretch which risks undermining our current operations. What is more, we have had to turn increasingly to Commonwealth forces to plug our recruitment and retention shortfall. Yet with the Government refusing to give an end date to our involvement in Iraq, and our mission in Afghanistan looking set to last another ten or twenty years, we cannot afford any further reductions in our force capabilities. For this reason, we need to look urgently at how we can provide Armed Forces for the future whilst overcoming the challenges of today.

Making up numbers is not enough, our Services have a worldwide reputation as a first-class fighting force and we need to maintain our highly-skilled Armed Forces with motivated, bright and well-trained individuals. Achieving this, however, will require a lot more action and a little less talk. The Government's recent White Paper entitled 'The Nation's Commitment' waxes lyrical about how it will improve service life, but if words are not reinforced with clear action they will become meaningless, further increasing the gap between Government and the forces.

Critically, we have to make sure that those who want to join the Armed Forces know that they will be looked after, on the front line and at home. Making people feel valued and respected is part of a wider initiative in work places, and the unique nature of service life should not mean it is exempt from this. Incentives can play a part, and although you cannot put a price on a job which involves regularly putting your life on the line, when compared to bus drivers, traffic wardens and similar public services an entry-level infantry soldier is paid a pittance.

Most importantly we should be honouring the military covenant and making it clear that those who risk the ultimate sacrifice for us in operations oversees can rest in the knowledge that they have the nation's support and that they and their families will be taken care of. Housing standards need to be improved, we need to reassess the nature of post-service and medical care and look to accommodate the specific circumstances of service life and the burdens that it places on military families.

Ultimately, we need a new Strategic Defence Review which puts service personnel at its heart and seeks to match our commitments to our capabilities, ensuring our personnel have the right equipment for the job and are prepared for whatever comes their way. Minimising overstretch will reduce the burden on our forces and should, in turn, bolster morale and, with any luck, our recruitment and retention levels.

We have an obligation through the 'duty of care' and should do far more to meet it. In so doing we can ensure that our Forces really can 'be the best', both now and for many years to come.