News

Council committee will debate Nepalese issue

By Stephanie Cockroft
December 14, 2011

A DEDICATED committee is being set up to deal with the "long-term problem" of Nepalese integration in Farnborough and Aldershot.

The new group, due to be in place by January, will give councillors the chance to debate the issue which, they say, will affect Rushmoor for years to come.

But an appeal by one member for the borough council to lobby the government for increased Gurkha pensions has been rejected.

The councillors said it was not their responsibility to appeal for such high-level decisions, despite the large number of Nepalese veterans in the area. The issues were discussed at Rushmoor Borough Council’s latest council meeting.

Cllr Keith Dibble, who put forward the motion for the new committee, said members felt frustrated at the lack of debate surrounding the growth of the Nepalese community in the borough.

He said: “It is a clear a number of members want the chance to engage in that debate.

“We could all debate on how we got to this problem, but where we are is where we are.

“There is no quick fix but we need to look at it carefully, because it will impact the towns for many years to come.”

Cllr Dibble said the issue would only be overcome by strategic planning and the chance for elected members to lobby different funding sources.

The majority of councillors agreed with his proposal.

Cllr Frank Rust suggested the group, which will report to cabinet, needed a broader remit than council representatives, particularly in relation to the "time bomb" of inadequate NHS funding for the Gurkha community.

But Cllr Steve Smith said the committee was too little, too late.

He said: “Anything available to our residents is already available to the Nepalese.

“I do not believe for one moment that we need to further any discussions.

“It is time to draw a line under the issue, get back to focusing on the welfare and well-being of all residents in the borough, and send a polite but blunt message that now is the time for them to stand on their own two feet.”

A heated debate then followed the suggestion, put forward by Cllr Crispin Allard, that the authority should support increased pensions for Gurkha veterans.

Cllr Allard told his colleagues it would be "fair and just" to increase Gurkha pensions, as many were living in poverty.

But Cllr David Clifford said it was not the council’s place to deal with pensions.

Council leader Peter Moyle also agreed with the sentiments of the motion, but said he did not want to raise the hope of Gurkhas in Rushmoor.

And Cllr George Paparesti declared Gurkhas should learn to "speak our language" before asking for any more, especially when they already get free education, healthcare and housing, he said.

But Cllr Charlie Fraser-Fleming slammed the members who were not supporting the pensions motion.

He asked for a recorded vote, so he could see who "truly supported the Gurkha community in Rushmoor".

Cllr Dibble, who leads the Labour contingent on the council, encouraged his colleagues to abstain from the vote.

He said the party did not want to be taken to the ballot box on an "emotional plea" about whether they cared for the Nepalese community.

The motion was rejected, with only three councillors voting in favour.

Rushmoor Borough Council is still waiting to hear how much of the £1.5m funding agreed by the government to ease Nepalese integration will find its way to the area.

| Submit Comments | View Comments (12)

« Previous Story | Next Story »

Most recent user comments 12 of 12

Show 15 | 25 | 50 per page

Taff Rail - An Excellent, informed response, and I agree 100%.

werfnala, Farnborough
19/12/2011 at 08:47

What a pity the three councillors voting to increase Gurkha Service Pensions, didn't opt for a debate with those who have some knowledge of the matter.

A proper exchange of views might show just how unworldly they are.

The claim that it would help impoverised Gurkhas is an extremely flawed one. This claim has nothing to do with impoverished Gurkhas, it stems from a claim by disgruntled former Gurkha Officers and NCOs already settled in UK, who hadn't and clearly still haven't, come to terms with missing-out on the post-1997 enhancements to Gurkha pensions that were made to bring Gurkha soldiers into line with British soldiers terms of service; after the Brigade of Gurkhas became a British based formation following the withdrawal from Hong Kong.

Over the years they have tried various means towards their objective including appeals at the High Court all of which have failed because the courts have upheld the manifest fairness of the pre-1997 arrangements.

They claim parity with British soldiers which is a very mis-leading claim. Anyone who has served in the British Army knows that British troops had to serve 22 years before pension, the Gurkhas merely fifteen before getting a pension which set them up very well on retirement in Nepal. And British soldiers who retired before 1975 and served less than 22 years got neither a pension of leaving nor a frozen pension payable at 65. Bearing that in mind it's fair to say that the Gurkhas got the better deal.

This claim for the Gurkhas pension increase, which is NOT supported by Joanna Lumley, Ex senior British officers or the Gurkha Welfare trust, is still on-going. They state that they are going to Europe with it next year. Those with a vested interest in this, have merely changed their tack in order to capitalise the situation in Aldershot. A situation that before Lumley's victory they were keen to play down-now it's beneficial to play up. How often on these pages have you read the claim "Pay us a higher pension and we won't have to come to UK" ?

Not only is it a claim without any sort of foundation, it's trying to encourage UK to spend billions for the benefit of a relative few. While everyone wants to improve their station in life, it is NOT poverty which is driving Gurkhas to UK, and it is certainly not poverty causing Gurkhas moving to UK after having previously having settled in Brunei or Hong Kong, who are now also coming here because Joanna has made it both possible and desirable.

I'd suggest that Cllrs Allard, Moyle and Fraser-Fleming stop falling for the propaganda and start studying the facts of the matter and a bit of recent history.

Taff Rail
16/12/2011 at 15:41

Well said Fireman Fred and Outermongolian. About time we looked after our own! I'm very fed up being a minority in the Town I have lived in for over 24 years. Having worked every day since being 15 and paid my way I resent paying to support the Gurkhas while my own son struggles to find employment.

MummaJu
16/12/2011 at 12:46

Like other respondents, I cannot see the relevance, mandate or authority of some members of RBC seeking to influence the national governement on pension policies for Nepalese soldiers.

I do not think that this matter appeared in ANY member's manifesto.

I hope that the "committee" does focus on ensuring that Rushmoor gets it fair share of the £1.5m offered by the government but the lack of joined up thinking and common objectives bodes ill for a well structured and managed approach to HMG.

I would have hoped that this issue, with its signifcant impact across the social and geographic divides of Rushmoor, would be one that actually unites RBC members in their oft stated objectives "to serve the residents of Rushmoor".

Retired of Aldershot, Aldershot
16/12/2011 at 08:31

I am glad that Cllr Charlie Fraser-Fleming asked for a recorded vote, so he could see who "truly supported the Gurkha community in Rushmoor". He has probably lost himself a whole bunch of votes on that one, come the next election.

werfnala, Farnborough
16/12/2011 at 08:06

makes me sooooo angry ! what about our own oaps, what about our own children, what about our own jobless, what about the nhs, what about schools, what about infastructure, all i hear is give give give, want want want !

Outermongolian
15/12/2011 at 19:08

Perhaps the Nepalese community could do their bit to integrate....by learning to speak english!

Fireman Fred, Rushmoor
15/12/2011 at 15:16

Hi Phooto, according to that PDF there are no issues to be concerned about at all! I'm glad RBC have cleared that up for us.

Dan B
15/12/2011 at 11:16

I'm amazed that they now are debating the 'issue' when only a month ago, they published a document tell us all that there was no issue. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1587376/201111/Gurkha_Migration_-_Answers_to_common_questions.pdf - interesting reading, but reads more like brainwashing propaganda to me!

Phooto, Farnborough
15/12/2011 at 09:34

"""it is not the role of the council to petition for Gurkha pensions to be increased. if it is then they can also lobby for for my neighbour who is 86 to have his pension increased and for that matter the thousands of other pensioners that live in the councils catchment area. I suggest that if the Gurkhas want a lobbyist for that they write to miss Lumley.""" sleeping beauty

I couldn't agree with you more, it seems that the council may be in danger of being suborned by the Pensions myth, The fact that Ms Lumley will have nothing to do with the pensions issue means that she is no longer popular with some Gurkha organisations based around Rushmoor. There's gratitude!

Still the government's handout will likely go a long way, this headline appeared in a local paper last week;

""Gurkhas hope for share of £1.5 government pot""

Where was this? Rushmoor, Farnborough? No, it was Swindon and the call was made by the Nepalese Association of Wiltshire. Standby for other towns wanting a slice of the action.

Taff Rail
14/12/2011 at 19:47

Well said sleeping beauty. My Father who is now 82 got a letter from the DWP just before his 80th birthday sent first class telling him that they were increasing his pension by 25p a week. He worked and paid tax in this country all of his working life (and he did his national service so yes he is an ex service man). He then spent most of the last 7 or 8 years providing care for my mother because she became disabled until we lost her last year, and the assistance they got was next to nothing. They even had to use their savings to have a stair lift put in to get mum up and down stairs.

Most people (except for those greedy company executives) are already or will soon be struggling financially because of the current financial conditions as price hikes outstrip static wages (some people haven't had any pay increases for years so have already seen their spening power erroded year after year), and to single out one group for special treatment would be completley wrong and an insult to everyone else.

Dawi, Aldershot
14/12/2011 at 18:22

it is not the role of the council to petition for Gurkha pensions to be increased. if it is then they can also lobby for for my neighbour who is 86 to have his pension increased and for that matter the thousands of other pensioners that live in the councils catchment area. I suggest that if the Gurkhas want a lobbyist for that they write to miss Lumley. this committee needs to look at local infrastructure and local issues that impact not only the Nepalese community but also the the community as a whole as a result of the arrival of the Nepalese, that is the restriction of this committee and its remit.