House of Commons Hansard Debates for 13 Feb 1992

Mr. David Trimble (Upper Bann) : Presumably the replacements for Fearless and Intrepid will be ships of a similar capacity and type, and will serve with the aviation support vessel, making a total of three. Is it necessary to have all those? Surely the need could be met by one or two ships along the lines of the US Tarawa class. With regard to the aviation support ship, the Minister will know that Harland and Wolff in Belfast recently successfully completed work on an aviation training ship. I hope that, consequently, Harland and Wolff will be among those invited to tender.

Mr. Clark : I take the hon. Gentleman's point, but whether Harland and Wolff tender is a matter for the company. I reject the hon. Gentleman's suggestion that the ships are not needed. I certainly would not want to downgrade to the standards of the second-line ships in the United States navy. The ships' predecessors, Intrepid and Fearless, served successfully for a long time, and played a key part in the last major military operation that the United Kingdom fought on its own.

Mr. Ian Taylor (Esher) : Does the Minister agree that the next generation of ships will very much depend on the high technology on board? I am grateful to him for announcing that a company in my constituency, Dowty-Sema Limited, is at the forefront in the project. Dowty-Sema is probably the world leader in project definition. Its role in replacing and increasing the technological competence of our ships, especially assault ships, is welcome in Esher, and I am sure that it will be good news for the Royal Navy.

Mr. Clark : I entirely endorse what my hon. Friend has said. When I consider the list of subcontractors available to supply and tender for systems in the project, I am impressed by the sheer richness and diversity that British manufacturing industry can still offer.

Mr. Neville Trotter (Tynemouth) : Does my right hon. Friend agree that this announcement is splendid news, both for the Royal Navy and for the country? Does it not prove that, unlike the Labour party, the Government are determined to maintain this country's defence capability in a world that continues to be uncertain and dangerous? The prospect of a £500 million order is most welcome in the shipyards of this country, especially Swan Hunter, with its splendid record of building carriers and amphibious ships. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a great prospect of work for that yard?

Mr. Clark : As I said to the hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Garrett), I look forward to a Swan Hunter tender. I am grateful for what has been said. We made the commitments in the original "Options" statement, and, although we cannot do everything at once, things are maturing precisely as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told the House that they would.

Column 1135

In round terms, the amphibious ships will be able to offer approximately 2,500 jobs each over three years, and I expect the helicopter carrier to offer approximately 1,500 jobs over the same period.

Mr. Andrew Hargreaves (Birmingham, Hall Green) : Like my hon. Friends, I warmly welcome my right hon. Friend's statement. I should be grateful to know, in due course, whether my right hon. Friend thinks that the number of jobs that he has suggested may be somewhat conservative. I am sure that the defence industry, and all the contractors, will warmly welcome the work available from the contracts, as do many hon. Members on both sides of the House.

Mr. Clark : That is a fundamental point. The figures that I mentioned involve only the workload and the jobs expectancy in the yards. Of course, there will be an immense initial spin-off in jobs in all the subcontracts which will provide systems such as gearboxes, communications, navigation aids, cabling, auxiliary propulsion and so on, on their own premises. I should think that, at the most conservative estimate, one could double the original jobs total.

Mr. Peter Viggers (Gosport) : Your task, Mr. Speaker, is being made easier by the fact that only one Back-Bench Labour Member has sought to ask a question on this crucial subject.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the announcement is good news for south Hampshire, for two reasons? First, local companies, including Vosper Thornycroft and GEC-Marconi, will be eligible to bid for part of the work. Secondly, the Government are keeping faith with the Royal Navy in providing it with the best equipment. That will ensure that, under the Conservative Government, the Royal Navy will continue to offer a first-class rewarding and stimulating career.

Mr. Clark : That is absolutely right. The Royal Navy will have much important work to do in the next 20 years, and I welcome my hon. Friend's endorsement of our determination to provide it with the best equipment for that task.

Yes, it is a pity that Labour Members, whose constituencies will undoubtedly be affected by the good news, have not seen fit to come to the House and welcome it. I fear that that betrays an insidious failing of the Labour party--I except the hon. Member for Houghton and Washington (Mr. Boyes) from this--in that it has a particular distaste for good news of any kind.

Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset) : My right hon. Friend will know that the Ministry of Defence and certain senior naval officers are keen on collocation. Has he given any thought to Dorset's bid to have a helicopter carrier ship based at Portland, next to the Portland helicopter repair facilities ? It would be close to Bovington, for training, and Holton Heath, where the amphibious forces are now based. It would also be close to the wonderful shipyards at Portland, which would do all the regular maintenance on the equipment--and Dowty-Sema and other defence equipment manufacturers are right alongside. Surely my right hon. Friend can tell the House now that Portland will be the home base for this wonderful helicopter support ship.

Column 1136

Mr. Clark : I am full of admiration for the way in which my hon. Friend gets his claims in so early, and extols the virtues of his constituency in all its many aspects. However, I think that the House will forgive me if I feel that it would be premature to specify where a ship that has not yet been built is to be based.

Mr. Michael Colvin (Romsey and Waterside) : My right hon. Friend and some of my other hon. Friends have been speculating about how a future Labour Government might find the money to pay for a £500 million project. May I ask my right hon. Friend to speculate on an even more remote possibility--the election of a Liberal Democrat Government ? How would such a Government pay for the project, in view of the Liberal Democrats' commitment to reduce our defence expenditure by 50 per cent. ?

Mr. Clark : That is true. I am sorry that the hon. and learned Member for Fife, North-East (Mr. Campbell) did not digress on that subject. Using the rough rule-of-thumb calculation that I made earlier, when I subtracted the Labour party's total commitments to find out what was left, I should say that the Liberal Democrats have already overrun their overdraft ceiling.

Mr. Bill Walker (Tayside, North) : My right hon. Friend will be aware how welcome his statement will be in Scotland--first, because 45 Commando is based in Tayside and, secondly, because the Scottish shipbuilding industry has a major contribution to make.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that every vote cast for the socialist nationalists in Scotland will be a vote cast against the best interests of 45 Commando ? No orders for ships would come to Scotland from the Ministry of Defence if the nationalists had their way.

Mr. Clark : I am afraid that that looks like the truth. In spite of the commitment made by the hon. Member for Houghton and Washington, I must in all candour tell him that if he ever had the chance, I do not think that he would be able to sustain it--the other members of his party would not allow him to do so. That fact is recognised by many people who work in the defence industry. My hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) should repeat in his constituency what he has just said.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood) : May I express my satisfaction that in the statement my right hon. Friend has redeemed the Government's declaration of intent in their White Paper "Britain's Defence for the 90s" to provide forces that are more mobile, more flexible and better equipped, and thereby better equipped to meet all eventualities in a highly unpredictable world? Will the three landing ships logistics, that are to be refurbished be out to tender for all the yards, namely, the naval constructors as well as the naval dockyards? Does that accord with the Government's policy for refits of Her Majesty's ships generally?

Mr. Clark : I am very glad to have the opportunity to confirm that. Although it is still some distance away, I regard that phase as being especially important in providing the full capability, as we undertook to do and on which my hon. Friend has congratulated us.

Mr. Boyes : I am greatly surprised by the criticism of the Labour party we have heard this afternoon because the Government have left such a big gap in our amphibious

Column 1137

forces for so long. I remind the Minister and the Secretary of State of what the right hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sir I. Gilmour) said on 31 March 1976. He told the House :

"it is impossible for an Opposition to draw up a detailed and fully-costed defence policy when in Opposition. Such a process can be carried out only after full consultation with the Services, with our Allies and with industry."--[ Official Report, 31 March 1976 ; Vol. 908, c. 1353.]

We will do just that in the next few weeks when we form the new Government.

Mr. Clark : There is nothing personal in the criticisms that I addressed to the hon. Gentleman. Our criticism is based on two factors. First--this is not a slight matter--only one Member of Parliament from a constituency that will benefit from the announcement has bothered to turn up and welcome it--

Mr. Don Dixon (Jarrow) : Two.

Mr. Clark : Two--I withdraw that comment. Not one, but two. Secondly, not one member of the shadow Cabinet has, to my knowledge, repudiated the repeated resolution and direction of the Labour party conference to cut defence spending by 27 per cent.

Department of Health (Leaks)

Mr. Andrew MacKay (Berkshire, East) : On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your guidance. You will recall that in business questions last week, I asked the Leader of the House whether it was possible to have a debate on the number of leaks coming out of the Department of Health and going straight to the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook). You will be aware that a Mr. Pashley has been caught as the mole and that a Mr. Graham Best, who is an adviser to the hon. Member for Livingston, is clearly implicated with Mr. Pashley. Have you received a request from the hon. Member for Livingston, as the shadow health spokesman, to make a personal statement bearing in mind his at least indirect implication in the crime?

Column 1138

Mr. Speaker : I heard that this matter was raised with the Leader of the House. I have received no such request from the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook).

Royal Assent

Mr. Speaker : I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified Her Royal Assent to the following Acts :

1. Consolidated Fund Act 1992

2. Stamp Duty (Temporary Provisions) Act 1992

3. Severn Bridges Act 1992

2. Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992

5. Social Security Administration Act 1992

6. Social Security (Consequential Provisions) Act 1992

7. Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992

8. Social Security Administration (Northern Ireland) Act 1992 9. Social Security (Consequential Provisions) (Northern Ireland) Act 1992

10. British Railways Act 1992

BILL PRESENTED

Cold Weather Credits

Mr. John McFall, supported by Mr. Edward O'Hara, Mr. Nicol Stephen, Mr. William McKelvey, Ms. Alice Mahon, Ms. Dawn Primarolo, Mrs. Margaret Ewing, Mr. Jimmy Dunnachie, Mr. John Battle, Mr. Dennis Turner, Mr. Malcolm Bruce and Mrs. Irene Adams, presented a Bill to provide for credits to be paid from the National Insurance Fund to low income households during winter months to compensate for additional fuel consumption as a result of climatic conditions ; and for connected purposes : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 21 February and to be printed. [Bill 77.]

Column 1139

Orders of the Day

Army Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr. Speaker : Before I call the Minister, I invite the House to look at the Bill and to see that it concerns the Ulster Defence Regiment being brought more fully into the Army by being merged with the Royal Irish Rangers. This is a narrow debate which is not connected to general Army matters such as "Options for Change". 5.4 pm

The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Archie Hamilton) : I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

The Bill concerns the future of a major element of the security forces in Northern Ireland. The House is all too well aware, especially perhaps from recent events, why we need to maintain and deploy forces on the present scale in that part of our country. Our forces are deployed there simply because we are totally and absolutely committed--I think that I speak for the whole House--to preserving the rule of law throughout the United Kingdom. There is no other reason. The rule of law in a democracy such as ours means that all citizens should be able to go about their lawful business peacefully and without fear of violence. It means that the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland about their future, democratically expressed, must prevail. No act of terrorist violence can be allowed to shake the commitment of Parliament to those principles. It is essential, therefore, that we continue to maintain and deploy sufficient forces to protect the vast majority of peaceful and law-abiding people in Northern Ireland against the continuing threat of terrorism, whether from republican or loyalist groups. The violence which the security forces seek to prevent cuts at the whole community of law-abiding citizens of both traditions in Northern Ireland. It may, as we have surely seen in recent weeks and all too often in recent years, leave another passer-by maimed, another wife widowed or another child orphaned. It may wreck another hotel, factory or shop, destroying jobs and discouraging the investment that is needed. All such violence leaves in its wake only tragedy and suffering. It will achieve nothing for any cause which the perpetrators may espouse.

All the security forces in Northern Ireland have a vital role to play in countering terrorism. Acts of terrorist violence, whatever their alleged political motive, are crimes. They must be treated as such. It is for the police to take the lead in dealing with crime. Clearly, however, for all its dedication and skill, the Royal Ulster Constabulary needs major support from the armed forces in its efforts to ensure that the terrorists will not succeed. For over 20 years now successive British Governments have committed a major part of our armed forces to Northern Ireland to support the RUC. That support will of course continue for as long as it is needed.

The role of the security forces is to prevent terrorist crimes from taking place, as far as possible, and when crimes have been committed, to seek out the perpetrators and deal with them in accordance with the law. That task makes heavy demands on all members of the security

Column 1140

forces day in and day out. The highest standards of training and personal conduct are required--so, too, is courage in dealing with people who are ruthless. I pay tribute to the bravery which all members of the security forces so regularly display in Northern Ireland, often in ways that do not come to public notice at all. There are three main elements to the forces that support the RUC. There are six regular infantry battalions serving on long tours of 30 months, and four on short six-month tours. There are then the support and specialist units, including Royal Navy vessels and helicopter support from the Royal Air Force as well as from the Army. There are, of course, the 6,000 or so men and women of the Ulster Defence Regiment.

The armed forces contribution amounts in total to about 17,000 service personnel actually deployed in Northern Ireland. The number of troops there is kept under constant review and we make adjustments to force levels as circumstances require. Since December 1990, we have deployed significant reinforcements on nine occasions, including the period running up to last Christmas, for example. Most recently, as the House will be aware, the second battalion of the Queen's Regiment has just been deployed to provide additional support to the existing forces.

The Ulster Defence Regiment continues to be a vital element in the security arrangements which I have just been describing. The House will recall that we announced last summer, in the Command Paper "Britain's Army for the 90s", our intention to bring the UDR more fully into the Army by merging it with the Royal Irish Rangers. The Bill provides the necessary legal framework for that merger to take place. I should like to explain to the House something of our thinking about that merger. Several considerations led the Army to propose it, and the Government to endorse and support that proposal. The UDR is the main focus of our attention today, but let me say a word first about the other partner to the merger. The conclusion was reached in the Army's restructuring exercise that, in the best interests of the Army as a whole, the Royal Irish Rangers would give up one of their two battalions. I do not suppose that that conclusion was particularly welcome to them, any more than similar conclusions were welcome to other regiments.

The considerations affecting the UDR were, of course, rather different. The international changes that have dictated reductions elsewhere in the Army do not apply to counter-terrorist efforts in Northern Ireland. So long as the terrorist threat persists at its present level, we shall continue to need the services of the men and women--more than 10 per cent. of the total --who currently serve in the UDR, both part-time and full-time.

We expect to continue to need all those people to perform the varied tasks that they undertake at present : foot patrols, vehicle patrols, as well as some helicopter-borne operations ; the operation of vehicle check points ; searches ; static guard duties ; and quick reaction operations following terrorist attacks. The RUC and the rest of the Army could not sustain their current effort without the continuing involvement of the UDR in all those activities. UDR duties can often be routine and uneventful, but in many cases the UDR has saved lives by deterring or preventing terrorist attacks, finding and seizing terrorist weapons and arresting suspected terrorists.

Column 1141

Mr. James Molyneaux (Lagan Valley) : Will the Minister of State assure the House that in no sense is there a hidden agenda, particularly with regard to the future of the part-time element of the Ulster Defence Regiment? Will he also assure us that nothing will be done to reduce the strength or to limit the role of that part-time element?

Mr. Hamilton : I can certainly give the right hon. Gentleman the assurance that he seeks. There is no hidden agenda whatsoever for any of those moves. They are done for military reasons and to give us a more professional unit than we have had in the past. The number of UDR part- timers relative to the overall number in the UDR has been declining and it is likely that that decline will continue. It is not a sharp decline but the decline has been steady over the years. The ratio of permanent to part- time cadre will continue to change in favour of permanent cadre. We do not seek to get rid of UDR part-timers, as they are an important element of the security forces in Northern Ireland. They give us a reserve, because they can be called up for full-time activity, as happened following the recent terrorist outrages in central Belfast.

Rev. Ian Paisley (Antrim, North) : Will the Minister give a figure? He says that the number of part-timers is going down. To what degree is that happening? Does the right hon. Gentleman prophesy that their number will continue to decline? Does he agree with what his senior colleague, the Secretary of State for Defence, said to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson) and me--that eventually there may be no part- time UDR?

Mr. Hamilton : I acknowledge that there has been a decline in the number of part-timers in the UDR and we consider that the number will continue to decline. Nevertheless, if one extrapolates from the graph of the decline in the numbers of part-timers, one sees that it will take many years before we reach the point where there are no part-timers at all. We would be most concerned if we reached that point, because the part-time element of the UDR is an effective reserve that can be called up, as it was the other day, to provide a cushion and deal with surges in commitments.

Mr. Peter Robinson (Belfast, East) : Is the Minister aware that when his comments are read back in Northern Ireland they will cause real concern? They could be interpreted as a sign that the part-time element is being phased out completely. It is clear that, under the Government's control, a steady reduction has taken place in the part-time element of the UDR and the Minister has told us that that will continue. There will be great concern that the Bill is, in effect, part of that sad and cruel betrayal of a regiment that has stood in the front line of the battle against terrorism.

Mr. Hamilton : I hope that I can give every reassurance possible. I am simply saying that it would be unrealistic to say that the decline in the number of part-timers in the UDR would suddenly stop--I do not believe that it will. That slight but steady erosion will continue. We are committed to having a part-time UDR. We very much value it, and we have proved recently how extremely useful part-timers are in giving us a reserve capability when terrorist incidents such as those that we have seen recently occur. I sincerely hope that the part-time UDR will

Column 1142

continue, but it is unrealistic to say that it will maintain its existing numbers, because there has been a decline in the past few years.

Mr. Molyneaux : Will the Minister, therefore, remove any possible suspicions that a plot is afoot by launching a campaign to encourage recruitment into the part-time element of the Ulster Defence Regiment?

Mr. Hamilton : We constantly look for recruits for permanent and part-time cadres, and that will continue. I see no changes there. It would be unrealistic of me to pretend that we shall maintain the present number of part-timers, but we value them very much. They are an essential part of the UDR as it stands and the Bill caters for them.

Rev. William McCrea (Mid-Ulster) : Perhaps the Minister will help the House by informing us exactly how much has been spent by the Ministry of Defence in advertising for part-time members of the UDR in the past two years.

Mr. Hamilton : I do not have that figure at my fingertips, but I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman a response when, with the leave of the House, I wind up the debate later this evening.

Mr. Roy Beggs (Antrim, East) : Has an assessment been carried out to establish the reasons for the decline in the part-time element of the UDR?

Mr. Hamilton : I cannot give an answer to that either, but I shall return to it in my winding-up speech, if that opportunity occurs. In carrying out those tasks, which are often dangerous, UDR soldiers use the same skills and equipment as the rest of the Army. It is common practice for units of the UDR and of other Army regiments to be deployed together on the same operations. The vast majority of UDR operations, as for the rest of the Army, are carried out to meet specific RUC requirements. All operations need RUC approval and Army patrols are accompanied by the RUC whenever possible.

As we do not expect the nature of those military duties to change, it may well be asked, "Why change the UDR?" The regiment is, after all, well established now. It has served Northern Ireland for almost 22 years with distinction and courage. The bravery of the UDR has been second to none. We think of its casualties : 244 of its members or ex-members killed-- "murdered" is the right word--many of them off-duty ; and some hundreds seriously wounded. We think of the bravery and resilience of the families, and we think of the loyalty and affection that all officers, soldiers and their families feel for their regiment.

With those thoughts in mind, it would be wrong to make changes to the UDR's structure unless we genuinely believe--as we do--that they are in the best interests of all the men and women who come forward to serve in the regiment, and in the best interests of Northern Ireland.

The UDR has, of course, been changing and developing ever since its creation in 1970. As originally conceived, it was to have been an almost entirely part-time reserve, available for a limited range of emergency services. It is now much more professional and better trained than it was at the beginning.

Column 1143

Furthermore, the UDR has now been on continuous active service for a longer period than any other Army unit since the Napoleonic era. Although the total numbers have varied, the permanent cadre of the UDR has continued to grow over the years. It is now slightly over 50 per cent. of the total strength. Many of the UDR's soldiers have served previously in the Regular Army.

The UDR has, by virtue of its continuous deployment and the vital security role that it has played, certainly earned its place as an integral part of the British Army.

Mr. James Kilfedder (North Down) : The Minister has given a glowing testimony to the men and women who have served in the Ulster Defence Regiment for so many years in the most appalling circumstances. Therefore, does he not think that it is a betrayal of all their service and dedication to take their name away--a name which, he has said, occupies an honoured position in the annals of military history? Is he aware that, for years, the IRA and its sympathisers have been seeking the destruction and obliteration of the UDR?

Mr. Hamilton : I have talked to a number of members of the UDR, both officers and those from other ranks, about the changes. I think that they welcome the opportunities that we are creating. I think that, unfortunately, UDR members have felt themselves to be the poor relations in the British Army in the past, but they now see themselves as being much more fully integrated into the Regular Army. That is a tribute to their professionalism and an acknowledgement of the fact that they are professional troops. I believe that they welcome the opportunity to serve in other areas--it is nice to have that opportunity. If someone originally joins the UDR on the basis that he was to live and serve in Northern Ireland, it is nice if he is then told that he can serve in a Regular Army unit and travel to places all over the world if he wants a break or a change in career. It is good that such opportunities, which were not previously open to members of the UDR, should be available now.

Mr. Michael Mates (East Hampshire) : I hesitate to interrupt my right hon. Friend, as I know that he has much more to tell us. However, lest people listening to the debate should think that the five interventions that we have had are typical of what is felt on the issue, I should tell my right hon. Friend that not only has the colonel of the Royal Irish Rangers appeared before the Select Committee on Defence and warmly welcomed the changes, but so have

Rev. William McCrea : Listen to the Back-Bench brigadier !

Mr. Mates : No, he is not a brigadier, he is a general--to give him his due, he is the assistant chief to the general staff and a very distinguished Northern Irish officer.

Rev. William McCrea : It is you we are talking about.

Mr. Mates : The part-time and full-time members of the UDR have welcomed the changes--

Rev. William McCrea : Rubbish.

Mr. Mates : Oh yes ; they have done so, as they know that their career prospects will be increased, as do those in the Royal Irish Rangers in the Regular Army, who are looking forward to working with residents of Northern Ireland.

Column 1144

Mr. Hamilton : I am grateful to my hon. Friend--that is the impression that I have received. Clearly, not 100 per cent. of the people want change, but the same is true of many different elements of the results of "Options for Change". We know that some people do not want to amalgamate with other units--that is true across the whole of the British Army--but a substantial number of UDR members, both officers and other ranks, welcome the change and realise that it is in the best interests of both the regiments involved and the British Army as a whole and can only enhance the professional way in which terrorism is tackled in Northern Ireland.

However, the UDR is still to an extent separate, distinct and somewhat apart from the rest of the Arrmy, which has often been to its disadvantage. Rightly or wrongly, some of its members have felt that they were perceived, and perhaps treated, as if they were in some sense "second class". Other developments have accentuated the UDR's difference with the rest of the Army. It has been labelled, to its great distress, as "sectarian"--despite the fact that its membership once included many Catholics, despite continuing efforts to recruit more Catholics and despite all the regiment's efforts to protect the entire community even-handedly.

The overwhelming concern since 1970 has been to serve the community, the whole community, of both religious traditions.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood) : Is not the decline in the number of Roman Catholics in the UDR, from--I think--18 per cent. when the regiment was formed in 1969 to about 3 per cent. now, largely due to a campaign of murder, intimidation, pressure and harassment by the IRA and its sympathisers?

Mr. Hamilton : It is--we can largely attribute the decline to that. The oppressive campaign has picked on the Catholics. The difficulty of so many Catholics in the UDR is that they live in Catholic communities, where they are much more vulnerable to other members who live in a community that might do more to protect them. That has made life difficult for them, and it is most regrettable that such a change has taken place. We shall continue to do everything that we can to reverse that trend and ensure that more members of the Catholic community join the UDR. I am not saying that that will be easy, but one of our aims should remain to recruit more Catholics into the UDR, and I hope that the proposed changes will help us to achieve that. I am not saying that, as a result of the proposed amalgamation, there will be a dramatic change in the percentage of Catholics--although there will be an increase in the regiment as a whole, as the Royal Irish Rangers now have a much higher percentage of Catholics in their ranks. However, not all of them come from Northern Ireland ; a number of them are recruited on the mainland of Great Britain.

The Ulster Defence Regiment members have no wish to be treated as some sort of political football. They want to get on with the job. They want to make the greatest possible contribution to the defeat of terrorism, whether from loyalist or republican groups. Against that background, we reached the conclusion that the UDR could only stand to benefit from closer integration with the Regular Army, by merging with the Royal Irish Rangers to form a new infantry regiment of the line.

Column 1145

The Royal Irish Rangers are uniquely well placed to help to bring the UDR more fully into the Army. They have close links with Northern Ireland, and a recruiting base throughout the British isles. The merger will provide an opportunity to enhance still further the professionalism and effectiveness that the UDR has already achieved. There will be an opportunity for a mutual exchange of experience and personnel between the two elements of the new regiment. The integration of training, and a common regimental approach, will improve the career and promotion prospects of members of the present UDR.

The proposal is to merge the two regiments on 1 July. The recommended name for the new regiment is the Royal Irish Regiment. That was the agreed recommendation of the two existing regiments. I know that some will regret the loss of the name "Ulster" from the title--the hon. Member for North Down (Mr. Kilfedder) mentioned that--but the new regiment's title must reflect the composition, history and traditions of both partners to the merger.

The new regiment will initially have two "general service" battalions, ex- Rangers, with a worldwide role. The reduction from two to one battalion will take place next year. There will initially be seven home service battalions, formed from the existing UDR. That is the current number of UDR battalions. It reflects the recent amalgamation of four smaller battalions to form two large ones--without, however, any reduction in the total strength. The new home service battalions will have the same internal security role within Northern Ireland as the UDR does at present.

There will be a single regimental organisation and single headquarters. Training for the regiment as a whole will be centred on the new regiment's training depot. So far as possible, training for general service and home service soldiers will take place together. We have not yet made final decisions on the location of the headquarters or the training depot. Those important matters are being studied at the moment.

We believe that the merger will have positive benefits for all the members of both regiments. The Royal Irish Rangers will bring to the new regiment the traditions of 300 years of distinguished service by famous Irish regiments, and close association with Northern Ireland. The Royal Irish Rangers have recently been a part of British Army of the Rhine, from which they have undertaken tours of duty in Northern Ireland. We would expect the new general service battalion similarly to serve in the Province from time to time in the future. For the Rangers, the merger will also mean that they retain their base in Northern Ireland, and new recruits will be able to undertake their initial training in the Province--which should be a popular move for many of them.

The UDR will bring to the merged regiment the best features of its own unique tradition--the concept of military service to the local community. Part-time, voluntary service is a vital feature of the UDR which will be fully preserved in the new regiment. Closer association with the rest of the Army will mean in practice a cross-fertilisation between the general and home service elements of the Royal Irish Regiment. There will be opportunities for home service officers and soldiers to volunteer for general service training and tours of duty.

Column 1146

Such opportunities will offer better prospects of career advancement and promotion for the former UDR officer and soldier. Although some members of the UDR and the Royal Irish Rangers might prefer not to have to change, some change is inevitable, and should be of benefit to both. Achieving the benefits is a worthwhile challenge to both regiments. The Royal Irish Regiment will be unique in its intermingling of general and home service elements. The challenge is to create, in the new home service battalions, an even more professional, effective and flexible security force, operating in support of the RUC, and accepted and respected by the whole community of Northern Ireland, while the general service element plays a successful wider role.

It may be helpful to explain to the House why there is a need for a Bill at all. No legislation is required to achieve the other regimental mergers that are currently planned. Primary legislation is needed in this case because the UDR has a statutory basis, uniquely for a British Army regiment. Some right hon. and hon. Members will remember the passage through the House of the Bill that became the Ulster Defence Regiment Act 1969 and brought the UDR into being on 1 April 1970. That Act was consolidated into the Reserve Forces Act 1980.

In a nutshell, the Bill enables the UDR to be treated just like any other regiment and enables its members to become members of a regular regiment. They will no longer be members of a statute-based regiment. The Bill thus provides the framework for the merger to take place on1 July.

The Bill does not itself bring into being the new Royal Irish Regiment. The naming and formation of regiments of the Regular Army, and the transfer of commissioned officers from one regiment to another on amalgamation, are not matters regulated by statute. They make no appearance, therefore, in our Bill.

Clause 1 provides that all members of the UDR will cease to be members of that regiment at the end of June. They will continue to be members of the armed forces and may be transferred to another corps or regiment. The effect of that provision is that commissioned officers could then be transferred to the Royal Irish Regiment by royal warrant, and soldiers could be transferred by administrative action.

Next Section

Home Page