Proposition 54K2902

Proposition de résolution demandant la mise en place d'un véritable suivi psycho-social des militaires belges avant, pendant et après leurs missions.

General information ¶

Authors

PS | SP Jacques Chabot, Stéphane Crusnière, Julie Fernandez Fernandez, Sébastian Pirlot

Submission date

Jan. 19, 2018

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

health care armed forces military personnel resolution of parliament psychology

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI Open Vld MR PVDA | PTB PP VB

Abstained from voting

∉ N-VA

Party dissidents ¶

• Kristien Van Vaerenbergh (N-VA) voted to adopt.
• Peter Luykx (CD&V) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Feb. 21, 2019 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr Hendrik Bogaert, rapporteur, and Mr Alain Top, rapporteur, refer to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, I would like to thank my colleagues from the various groups for supporting this text in the Defence Committee. I also thank our two rapporteurs, Mr. Top and Bogaert.

This text gives a clear mandate to the government to ensure its immediate follow-up. I think, in fact, that the topic discussed here, the well-being of our military in the context of operations, must transcend all political divisions. The quality of the work of the Belgian military is no longer to be demonstrated and is also frequently welcomed by our various European and international partners. Belgian military personnel are to be deployed on operations scenes varied both by the nature of their missions and by the level of dangerousness and complexity of these missions on human, material or environmental levels.

Our Defence missions in Afghanistan, Iraq or Mali are recent examples of this, as we have seen during visits to our military in field missions, as well as during our parliamentary work in the Defence Committee or in the Special Surveillance Committee for Operations Abroad.

After several months of intensive deployment, it is hard to find that the return to ordinary life can be brutal for women and men who make up our armed forces. This finding has also recently been drawn by several military unions who have supported our text and shown its full utility.

The striking testimony at our committee hearings also, unfortunately, justified the importance of the debate that our group launched on the basis of this proposal.

The potential trauma that our military can suffer from facing war experiences in operation requires a differentiated approach. In fact, they can materialize into self-repulsion, depression, or an inability to return to a normal life.

These symptoms of post-traumatic stress are difficult to spot in soldiers returning from the front and therefore require specialized long-term follow-up, with expertise that must be absolutely present within our Defense. The medical component and, in particular, the sustainability of the Royal Military Hospital have therefore a crucial role to play here, although this point no longer appears as such in the amended proposals in the committee – which I can regret – I wanted to recall.

If the existing devices are welcome and seem to work when the military requests them, I believe it is up to the political authority to review them and improve them, if necessary, as part of a genuine long-term vision and in a much more systematic, preventive and integrated way. I insist: this must be the case, even without any explicit request being made. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of real preparation for the return. The absence of an authentic mechanism in this area seems to me worrying at a time when the attraction rate, ⁇ among young military personnel, remains extremely high and worrying. These are elements that pose a heavy burden on the future of our armed forces and their sustainability.

Furthermore, the strategic vision attributes combat missions to a key function of our Defense. This de facto involves evaluating and adapting, in particular with the military unions, the resources made available to our military personnel throughout their careers and missions. This assessment could be carried out in the form of an exchange of best practices with our neighbors with expertise in this area, in order to improve our device before, during and after the operations in which our military is expected to participate.

Our French counterparts have done very interesting work on this topic. This reassessment could also be done, why not, in collaboration with other Belgian public services concerned by the problem, as indicated in the new request No. 4 submitted by my colleagues.

Our text opens several paths without imposing anything, because it is on the basis of this in-depth evaluation work that it will be about taking real measures. We hope that the government will launch this assessment without delay, the House giving it a clear mandate.

I once again take the opportunity to draw your attention to request no. 3, which implies that from now on, in the Special Commission for the Monitoring of Missions Abroad, our Minister reports every six months the relevant elements of psychosocial monitoring provided to the Belgian military in the context of operations in which the Defence has been able to take part.

I will conclude by pointing out that the attraction figures and the latest often catastrophic internal investigations conducted among Belgian military personnel remind us how crucial it is to take into account their well-being and improve it both in operations and when they are back in their family life. The main resource of a future army, capable of fulfilling the tasks entrusted to it, are the men and women who make up it. Let us never forget it! Therefore, I hope, again, to be able to count on your support for this text.

The theme of well-being and of course the psychosocial guidance of military personnel suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome are extremely important for our group. Former Minister Vandeput has always put well-being first. He has taken a lot of steps forward, especially in the field of prevention.

However, addressing a resolution to a government in ongoing affairs seems to us to make little sense. They ask a government to do something, but which government is asking it? We are a constructive group and we have therefore asked in the committee to pour that resolution into a bill. Unfortunately, you did not take this into account.

In summary, we think the topic is extremely important, but your resolution may only shake your conscience because you dropped a document. Unfortunately, it will yield very little. Our group will abstain in the vote.