Guidance

VAPC London: meeting minutes 23 March 2022

Updated 19 September 2024

Venue: Barclays Rise, 41 Luke Street, London EC2A 4DP with some members joining using Microsoft Teams

Time: 4pm to 5.30pm

Present

• Sir Bill Charles (BC) – Chairman
• Jim Blake (JB)
• Caroline Flynn Macleod (CFM)
• Bishnu Gurung (BG)
• Robin Herzberg (FRH)
• Matthew Neave (MN)
• Oliver Leeming (OL)
• Charles Perrett (CP)
• Alpa Raja (AR)
• Larry Stone (LS)
• Brian Willmore (BW)

Apologies

• Annabel Goulding (AG)
• Carl Hunter (CH)
• Nick Mazzei (NM)
• Wendy Morris (WM)
• Alex Woolgar-Toms (AWT)
• Frances Luczyc Wyhowska (FLW)

Welcome

The chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting

Derek Stewart made a few introductory remarks about Barclays Rise and the work that the business had been undertaking for veterans (including Civvy Street).

Apologies for absence

It was noted that AG, NM, WM, and FLW had been unable to attend, and that CH and AW-T had been unable to connect by Microsoft Teams.

Minutes of 22 September 2021 meeting

The minutes, which had been circulated, were approved and ready to be sent to the Ministry of Defence for publication.

Action: BC

Reports from the teams

FRH had prepared a report on the work of the National Steering Group on Employment and Transitioning which included three members from London (FRH, LS and FLW), one member from Wales (Bev Garside) and one from the East Midlands (Stav Melides). Issues discussed included the need to understand and share best practice on employment and transitioning within the regions e.g. the use of apps, the appointment of Armed Forces Liaison Officers within local authorities and arranging invitations for HR directors and veterans to join functions. FRH and LS emphasized the importance of the aim of identifying and advancing practical point and solutions.

The reports from the National Steering Group on Veterans & The Law and the National Steering Group on Finance & Debt were noted.

CFM reported on parliamentary engagement:

• (i) 73 letters sent by email to all 73 Greater London MPs. All acknowledged receipt automatically.
• (ii) Email replies received from 5 MPs
• (iii) Three emailed replies -Stephen Twigg MP Newham NE, Helen Hayes MP Dulwich and East Norwood, Andrew Rosindell MP Romford and nominated a contact in their office
• (iiiv) Helen Buchan MP Kensington wanted to meet on 21 February. At the meeting she told CFM and BC that she has not encountered any Veterans related issues in her constituency work, not aware of Veterans rough sleeping, but knows it is an issue in Westminster. She has visited a long-term hostel where residents appeared to be mostly Veterans and will send further details
• (v) Nickie Aiken MP, Cities of London and Westminster wishes to meet on 29 March. CFM and BC will meet her then
• (vi) The email letter will be resent as a prompt to see if any further interest. Lack of response may suggest that not many Veterans issues reach the crisis point where help is sought from there and problems, if there are any, may be dealt with by other organisations
• (vii) Next step is to prepare an amended letter to London Assembly Members and decide when to send it

BC’s Report / Reporting of the members of LVAPC as the regional group under the TOR and as LVAPC

BC reported on the proposed process for reporting to the minister under the Terms of Reference:

• (i) each regional committee would write its own report
• (ii) a member of SWVAPC, Anica Alvarez Nishio, would (alone or with help from another volunteer) copy-edit the reports and write a high-level summary – in doing so she would not change the substance
• (iii) regional chairs would review and comment – the summary would then be finalized and was likely to set out the main recommendations to be raised with the minister
• (iiiv) a meeting between the minister and the chairs is set to take place on 11 May.

BC also reported on a meeting between two chairs and Veterans UK and others at which the following reporting requests in addition to those set out in the template taken to the meeting had been made in respect of the new Armed Forces Covenant (‘AFC’) duty: (a) provide an overview of the principal Covenant-related issues in each region. (b) provide an evidence-based assessment of the perceived local/regional effectiveness of the various national/regional/local initiatives relating to veterans. (c) identify local/regional examples of good practice relating to the provision of services to the veteran community under either the Covenant or Veterans Strategy and highlight examples that could either benefit from additional support or promotion, and/or be replicated elsewhere. (d) help identify forgotten cohorts. It was noted that Vets UK were proposing a briefing session on the new Armed Forces Covenant reporting duty in spring 2022.

BG emphasized the importance of the welfare of veterans’ families as well as the veterans themselves. He also referred to problems concerning Armed Forces Champions in and outside the DWP and indicated a willingness set up a meeting to provide information on the approach in Hounslow to veterans’ issues including the AFC and in support of the points he had made on families, AF Champions and the DWP It was agreed that this could well be very useful to inform other projects and work and to identify from an evidence base practical recommendations founded on the points that BG was making

BW suggested establishing a “toolkit” for local authorities to operate when dealing with veterans on housing issues.

CP mentioned that London District had already created a number of cards which helped to point veterans and local authorities in the right direction.

BC asked whether there was any disagreement on the approach to reporting set out in his circulated report and/or to the content of the draft report under the TOR that he had circulated. None was expressed.

After the discussion the following was agreed:

• (i) there was general support for the approach in BC’s report and subject to alteration of the recommendation on employment and transition after further discussion with FRH and LS for the recommendations in that draft were supported
• (ii) to give BC the authority to complete the report by the members of LVAPC, to support or refuse support for the summary prepared by Anica or any other proposed document / summary or letter proposed under the reporting process in the relevant timescale (BC indicated that if practicable he would circulate documents before they are finalized and would consult with a FRH and LS on the passaged relating to employment and transition
• (iii) the aim of the report is to show how the members of LVAPC (and its parallel group) see the product of their projects being by reference to what to what they see as the best way in which they can add value to the achievement of the Veterans’ Strategic Plan
• (iiiv) to include the description of the planned work provided by Alex Page. It engages the identification of needs, resources and has a link to AFC issues, initiatives and other good practice
• (v) to complete the part relating to employment and transition by adopting the report of the national steering group on employment and transitioning and the earlier work on this area by our team – this work clearly links to AFC issues
• (vi) to complete the part relating to the work thus far with Members of Parliament as reported to the meeting by CFM – which also has a link to AFC issues, initiatives and other good practice
• (vii) as in the draft to refer to the housing project which is also likely to engage the AFC, initiatives and other good practice
• (viii) as in the draft to reaffirm the LVAPC position on the issue relating to standard tasks of Veterans UK in administering the compensation schemes – and this links to an objective of the national finance team
• (ix) as in the draft to reaffirm the LVAPC position on the issues relating to a statutory base for VAPC members and so the need for the Private Members Bill
• (x) save as recorded above members did not identify (i) what other areas are most likely to engage the AFC in London – both in respect of the duty and its wider application and take up or (ii) experience / knowledge that addresses any of the issues in the headings of the template

Action: All

Next steps

BC said that he would provide feedback after the meeting with the minister on 11 May 2022.

Action: BC

BC referred to his discussions with Tracy Bryant, Chief Executive of the Association of Service Drop-in Centres (ASDIC). Tracy had described the ASDIC landscape in London and the contacts involved.

FRH mentioned the excellent work that Mark Evans and his team at Waterloo Uncovered had been undertaking.

BC asked for volunteers to develop the relationships with ASDIC and Waterloo Uncovered and to support the work that Alex Page (with at present CP) was undertaking with the London Boroughs.

Action: All

JB mentioned the differences between issues facing veterans by reference to the length of their service, the benefits of mentoring veterans and the need to obtain more intelligence from veterans on their issues and concerns through initiatives such as drop ins / meetings organized by the Surrey Fire Service. He agreed to circulate a document setting out such initiatives / projects that might be replicated or supported in the London area

Action: JB

Any other business

There was no other business.