| Home Page |
Column 749
House of Commons
Tuesday 12 January 1993
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]
DEFENCE
Arms Sales
1. Mrs. Mahon : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent contacts his Department has had with the Indonesian Defence Ministry about arms sales.
The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Archie Hamilton) : My Department has a number of contacts with the Indonesian Defence Ministry covering a variety of issues. Those contacts are, however, a confidential matter for the two Governments.
Mrs. Mahon : Will the Minister confirm that the sale of British Aerospace Hawk combat aircraft to Indonesia is to go ahead? Is he aware that the Indonesian Government have illegally occupied East Timor for many years and have killed more than a third of its population? Does not he feel any shame at all that, despite the lessons of the Gulf, the British Government are continuing to sell arms to a murderous dictator?
Mr. Hamilton : The point of selling Hawk aircraft to Indonesia is to give jobs to people in this country. There is no doubt in my mind that a Hawk aircraft can do nothing to suppress the people of East Timor. The aircraft is not suitable for that purpose and we have guarantees from the Indonesians that the aircraft would not be used for internal suppression.
Mr. Nicholls : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, by third- world standards, the Indonesian regime's human rights record is considerably better than many and is improving all the time? Does he share my sadness that a country which is trying to improve its human rights record, which will be the major player in that part of the world and which has shown that it wants to be friends with Britain, should be constantly denigrated in ludicrous terms such as we have just heard?
Mr. Hamilton : Yes, and the fact that we do business with Indonesia puts us in a position where we can influence the actions of that Government. We constantly make every effort to improve their human rights record and to improve the situation in East Timor.
Scottish Regiments and Battalions
2. Mr. Salmond : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received in the review of Scottish regiments and battalions ; and if he will make a statement.
Column 750
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Malcolm Rifkind) : A number of representations have been received about the future of Scottish regiments and battalions, all of which have been noted.
Mr. Salmond : Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that it is becoming abundantly apparent from those representations that the regiments and the infantry are becoming overstretched on current commitments? Given that, will the Secretary of State further acknowledge that a reassessment of the Government's position on regimental mergers in Scotland would be welcome? The Secretary of State will have seen the comments of the hon. Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) that he has already been engaged in such a private reassessment. Is that the case and, if so, will he take this opportunity to share that information with the rest of the House?
Mr. Rifkind : The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question refers to Army manpower as a whole. I am satisfied that at present we can meet all our obligations without undue overstretch. If I ever came to a different conclusion, it would be appropriate to review the assumptions of "Options for Change".
Mr. Bill Walker : Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that he has always made it clear that Army manpower and the pressures on the Army are subject to constant review in the light of events? That is what I have been saying. Will he also confirm that the Scottish regiments are part of the fabric that makes the United Kingdom united, as is Rosyth dockyard, and that the political implications must also be taken into consideration?
Mr. Rifkind : I can certainly confirm that the Scottish regiments have made a fine and honourable contribution to the requirements of the United Kingdom armed forces over many years and I am sure that that will continue. As my hon. Friend knows, the future of the dockyards in the United Kingdom is presently under consideration.
Dr. Reid : What a complacent answer that was from the Secretary of State when neither he nor the Minister of State for the Armed Forces can give me a guarantee that our infantry men and women serving in Bosnia will not receive redundancy notices even while they are there and under fire. Is not it clear that we cannot possibly sustain two extra battalions in Northern Ireland, maintain an extended military force in Bosnia, assign units to an enhanced Western European Union, as the Secretary of State has promised, and contribute to the Gulf on the basis of defence plans that were drawn up before any of those commitments were known? Why does not the Secretary of State now do the honourable thing, carry out a full defence review and ensure that we have the troops necessary to meet the commitments that he and the Foreign Secretary keep making?
Mr. Rifkind : I would find the hon. Gentleman's indignation less synthetic if he did not represent a party whose conference called for further reductions in defence expenditure amounting to many billions of pounds. He should make up his mid about whether his party's policy accords with the views of its members.
Column 751
Arms Sales
3. Mr. Nigel Evans : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on defence sales to Kuwait.
Mr. Rifkind : I signed a defence equipment memorandum of understanding with Kuwait on 2 December. This will enable Kuwait to purchase defence equipment directly on a Government-to-Government basis from the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, which will place and manage contracts with British equipment manufacturers. Negotiations are already taking place for the sale of GKN's Warrior and Piranha vehicles.
Mr. Evans : That news will be welcomed by the many thousands of people who are involved in the defence industry in this country, especially in the north-west. In 1990, defence sales amounted to £3 billion.
Will my right hon. and learned Friend note the policy of Opposition Members who are opposed to the sale of arms to non-democracies, thereby jeopardising this country's defence industry and the contract that he has mentioned? That could lead to a loss of jobs in this country.
Mr. Rifkind : My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the remarks of the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes), who, speaking on behalf of the Opposition, opposed any arms sales to non-democracies. If his policy were implemented, the many British industries that will benefit from sales to countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and to middle eastern countries, would be gravely jeopardised and there would be many job losses as a consequence.
Mr. Dalyell : Has the Secretary of State, or any senior Ministry of Defence official, read Kenneth Timmerman's book "The Death Lobby--How the West Armed Iraq"? Given the behaviour of the Kuwaitis towards the Palestinians and many others who built up Kuwait, given the human rights situation and given the legal difficulties over the border with Iraq, would not it be better--in the face of the appalling abyss presented by the alternative--at least to enter into some kind of dialogue with Baghdad?
Mr. Rifkind : The hon. Gentleman is incredibly naive if he believes that dialogue with Baghdad is likely to prove fruitful. At this very moment, we are witnessing Saddam Hussein's intransigence in refusing to recognise even the authority of the United Nations Security Council.
Mr. Conway : Will my right hon. and learned Friend take the opportunity to congratulate the excellent management and work force of GKN in Shropshire, which makes the Warrior vehicle--and, more important, Perkins Engines in Shrewsbury, which produces the engine that fires that tremendous vehicle--on the expertise and workmanship that have resulted in such a saleable product?
Mr. Rifkind : I am happy to do so. The fact that the United Kingdom has increased its share of the world market from 17 to 20 per cent. in the past year is a tribute to the professionalism, experience and dedication of the many hundreds of thousands of people who work in our defence industries, including those mentioned by my hon. Friend.
Column 752
Mr. David Clark : Have the Kuwaitis made any requests for defence equipment recently, in view of the Iraqi incursions into their territory? Do the Government believe that the United Nations did or did not approve that equipment and what does the Secretary of State think should be done if the incursions continue?
Mr. Rifkind : We are currently negotiating with the Kuwaitis about their possible interest in Warrior and Piranha armoured vehicles. They have expressed great interest in taking forward the contracts. As for the recent incursions into Kuwaiti territory, the United Nations Security Council has made it clear that that is unacceptable behaviour and has demanded that the Iraqis return the Silkworm missiles that were removed and cease their transgressions with regard to the frontier between Iraq and Kuwait.
Mr. Cyril D. Townsend : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, apart from selling arms to Kuwait, we should give the Kuwaitis strong advice about how to protect the defence equipment in their care? Will he and the Government ensure that representations are made--not only to the United Nations, but to the Kuwaiti authorities--about the recent scandalous stealing of equipment by the Iraqis which suggests that the Kuwaiti authorities have been extremely negligent?
Mr. Rifkind : The equipment in question was in the hands of United Nations personnel, who, under United Nations rules, are unable to be armed. For that reason, the Iraqis who crossed the border were able to remove the equipment. That was unacceptable and the Security Council has made its views known.
Mr. Dalyell : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply--
Madam Speaker : Order. As it was not the hon. Gentleman's substantive question, I cannot take that as a point of order.
Options for Change"
4. Mr. Llwyd : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what cutbacks in defence procurement are envisaged in Wales due to the policies inherent in "Options for Change".
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The effect on Wales of any reductions in defence procurement will depend on individual companies' success in winning business and on their commercial decisions about the size and location of their manufacturing facilities.
Mr. Llwyd : Does the Minister agree that the west of Wales has suffered very badly recently, with the imminent closure of RAF Brawdy and Trecwn and today's news that 300 jobs will go at Pendine? Will he assure us that the Ministry will work closely with the Welsh Office to secure some new job opportunities for this highly skilled work force, who are literally without hope?
Mr. Hamilton : We are already working closely with the Welsh office on Trecwn and Brawdy in west Wales. We keep in touch about the other ramifications of the proposals, but we are not directly responsible for defence
Column 753
manufacturers in Wales. We very much regret the adjustments that were made to the work force which led to the recent job losses.Mr. John Marshall : What would have happened to defence procurement in Wales and elsewhere if my right hon. Friend had listened to the advice of members of the Labour and Liberal parties?
Mr. Hamilton : Exactly. It is always amazing to see the resolutions that are passed at the conferences of the Opposition parties to cut defence expenditure radically, yet during defence questions Opposition Members constantly jump up and down saying that job losses are regrettable and that we should do all that we can to stimulate orders for defence equipment. As my hon. Friend said, the two do not tie together. The effect of a Labour Government, or indeed a Labour-Liberal Government, would be devastating on defence jobs across the country.
Mr. Alan W. Williams : In the past few days it has become clear that the Pendine proof and experimental establishment in my constituency is under severe threat of closure under the defence review, with the loss of 300 jobs. The base has several unique facilities. It has an excellent cost- efficiency record with the lowest cost per employee of any land unit and it is the only base that makes a profit. Will the Minister assure me that decisions about the future of these establishments will be based on fair cost comparisons? What has he to say to the 300 people in Pendine who are worried about their jobs?
Mr. Hamilton : Whenever a decision is taken to close a defence establishment, every consideration is taken into account, including the implications for local employment. The fact remains that we are dealing with a receding and reducing defence budget and must find savings where we can.
Mountain Rescue
5. Mr. Canavan : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations he has received about his Department's participation in mountain rescue work ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My Department has received a number of representations about its participation in mountain rescue work. The open government document, "The Future Provision of Royal Air Force Search and Rescue Helicopters", gives full details of the services that are made available by my Department for mountain rescue work. A copy is in the Library of the House.
Mr. Canavan : Is the Minister aware that heavy demand over the Christmas and new year period exposed the inadequacy of the existing helicopter emergency service? For example, a fortnight ago the Killin mountain rescue team took four hours to carry an injured man off a treacherous mountainside because all the helicopters were otherwise engaged. As the decision to withdraw the helicopter emergency service from Leuchars from April was taken without any meaningful consultation with bodies such as the Scottish Sports Council and the Mountain Rescue Committee for Scotland, will the Minister act now to ensure meaningful consultations with
Column 754
a view to reversing the closure decision and to replacing the Wessex flight at Leuchars with Sea Kings? Otherwise, there is a real danger that lives will be lost.Mr. Hamilton : I cannot comment on the particular case of a mountain rescue team taking four hours to bring someone down, but, in such circumstances, the weather is invariably so bad that mountain rescue teams are the only people who can get to the beleagured person. We should not fool ourselves--nor should the hon. Gentleman--that helicopters can operate in all weathers, because they cannot. The point of mountain rescue teams is that they can operate in virtually any weather whereas helicopters cannot always reach the necessary areas.
While making changes to the search and rescue operation, we are fulfilling the civil requirement of being able to get anywhere from the base within an hour and that will be adequately carried out by the Sea Kings from Lossiemouth.
Mr. Menzies Campbell : Will the Minister take the opportunity to commend the efforts of the mountain rescue team at RAF Leuchars which, in the past 24 hours, has been engaged in such tasks as rescuing stranded motorists and ensuring that meals on wheels are delivered to those who need them? Does he realise that such efforts create a very warm relationship between the Royal Air Force and the community and that that relationship is likely to be prejudiced by the withdrawal of search and rescue facilities from RAF Leuchars because it is well known that the quality of cover will be reduced in Fife and that lives may be put at risk? There is still time for the Government to think again and to accept that the best way in which to proceed is to replace the Wessex with the Sea King at RAF Leuchars.
Mr. Hamilton : To answer the first part of the hon. and learned Gentleman's question, I certainly commend the mountain rescue team at Leuchars and I am glad that it will continue to carry out its job there. I have already commented on helicopters--mountain rescue teams need them to take up their advance parties, but they move independently with the bulk of their people and are not dependent on helicopters for their work. I accept the hon. and learned Gentleman's point about the recent very bad weather-- about 60 cars were identified by the helicopters from Leuchars--but the Sea Kings from Lossiemouth will cover most of that area. As the hon. and learned Gentleman acknowledged, they are much better helicopters and can fly in much worse weather.
Mr. Martlew : Does the Minister accept that his decision last October to close four RAF bases involved in search and rescue will mean an extra response time in coastal areas and in the mountains? It is not good enough for the Minister to say that we shall continue to meet the civil criteria, because his decision last October will mean that lives will be lost. Will he decide today to reverse the closures and satisfy the need for rescue teams in coastal and mountain areas because we are frightened that, if he does not, lives will be lost?
Mr. Hamilton : Our search and rescue capability is set up for military needs and we have found that we can reduce the military requirement and still remain well within the civil requirement. It must be true that if one doubled the number of search and rescue bases and cut response time to half an hour, the number of people who
Column 755
suffered as a result would probably fall, but that would involve enormous costs. The civil requirement means getting a helicopter there within an hour and we are still able to fulfil that civil requirement.Arms Diversification
6. Mr. Miller : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representation his Department has received about Government assistance towards arms diversification.
Mr. Rifkind : We receive a variety of representations from time to time on the question of arms diversification. The product ranges in which companies compete is, however, a matter best left to their own commercial judgment.
Mr. Miller : Against the background of recent arms cuts involving redundancies in my area, such as those at British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., British Aerospace, GEC and Cammell Laird, and in view of the Government's statement at the NATO meeting in Rome in November 1991 that they would support eastern European countries in their diversification, does not the Minister think that it is about time that he gave such support to British companies? Does he agree with the managing director of British Aerospace's military aircraft division that the Government have no policy on spin-off technologies?
Mr. Rifkind : British industry has not requested Government assistance for diversification. That is perfectly straightforward because it believes, rightly, that it is in the best position to judge what is in the interests of companies and how best to diversify to meet its changing needs. I remind the hon. Gentleman that, notwithstanding defence cuts, £9 billion worth of orders are placed primarily with British industry for defence procurement, so it is a continuing massive source of employment.
Mr. Ian Bruce : My right hon. and learned Friend has the difficult task of trying to trim the defence budget to close to our target, which is well above what the Opposition parties would try to achieve. Has he had conversations with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade about the moneys available for communities that will be affected by defence cuts? When we cut miners' jobs, the Government immediately had £1 billion available for the mining communities. It seems strange that we do not have similar plans for the communities affected by defence cuts.
Mr. Rifkind : As my hon. Friend will be aware, any area that experiences large unemployment can benefit from the Government's regional policy and from the special assistance available to parts of the country that fall within the relevant criteria.
Nuclear Warheads (Soviet Union)
7. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his latest estimate of the number of nuclear warheads remaining within the area of the old Soviet Union.
Mr. Rifkind : We estimate that there are some 27,000 or more nuclear warheads remaining within the area of the old Soviet Union.
Column 756
Mr. Banks : There would be a big bang if they all went off together. All sane people clearly welcome the START 2 strategic arms reduction treaty. What financial and technical assistance has been provided to Russia, to Ukraine and to the other countries in eastern Europe to dismantle their nuclear weapons? Goiven START 2 and the end of the cold war, is not it time for the Government to give up the ridiculous Trident scheme? It is a criminal waste of money as there is clearly no enemy against which it will be pitched. It seems to be a case of political penis envy by the Government.
Mr. Rifkind : On the earlier part of the question, we are providing support to Russia and to other countries in a similar position for dismantling their surplus nuclear weapons. As for the rather absurd comments in the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks, I remind him that not only does the former Soviet Union still have 27,000 nuclear warheads, but even after 10 years and the full implementation of the START 2 agreement, Russia will still have more than 3,000 strategic nuclear warheads, which is more than enough to create enormous devastation around the world.
Mrs. Browning : Will my right hon. and learned Friend assure the House that we shall monitor the decommissioning and movement of those warheads in the Soviet Union? Will he also assure the House that Britain will maintain an independent nuclear deterrent as long as it is felt expedient to do so and while there are threats around the world from who knows where--not only from the old Warsaw pact countries--which make such a deterrent vital for the safety of our people?
Mr. Rifkind : My hon. Friend is entirely correct. Measures will be taken to monitor the decommissioning or destruction of surplus nuclear weapons in Russia and in the United States. On the latter part of my hon. Friend's question, the United Kingdom's approach has always been to maintain the minimum deterrent that we require. In the case of Russia and the United States, there were aspirations to parity which resulted in huge increases in strategic nuclear weapons in both countries. Those weapons are now being cut by two thirds. We very much welcome that change, but both the United States and Russia will still have many more strategic nuclear weapons than the United Kingdom contemplates.
Somalia
8. Mr. Hanson : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the progress of the United Kingdom involvement in the military operation in Somalia.
Mr. Rifkind : The United Kingdom has deployed two Royal Air Force Hercules aircraft together with about 90 RAF personnel to assist in Operation Restore Hope in Somalia. The aircraft are currently based with United States forces in Mombasa in Kenya and since 12 December have been engaged in the transport of humanitarian relief stores to affected areas inside Somalia.
Mr. Hanson : Given Britain's historic role in Somalia, does the Secretary of State agree that we should be doing far more than we are at present to assist the United Nations relief operation there? Is it not the case, however, that, due to the mismanagement of defence forces alluded
Column 757
to earlier, we are not capable of supporting United Nations resolutions but have to rely on the world's policeman, the United States, to do it for us? Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the defence review is needed urgently?Mr. Rifkind : The hon. Gentleman could not be more incorrect. With more than 3,500 British forces allocated to various United Nations operations around the world, Britain is at present contributing more personnel to the work of the United Nations than any country other than France. That shows the worthlessness of the hon. Gentleman's criticism.
Surface Ships (Portsmouth)
9. Mr. David Martin : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many commissioned surface ships of the Royal Navy are based at Portsmouth.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : There are 23 Royal Navy surface ships, including minor war vessels, base-ported at Portsmouth.
Mr. Martin : My right hon. Friend is aware of my concern to see the maximum number of ships based at Portsmouth, with the implications that that has for the provision of jobs for the fleet maintenance and repair organisation. May I thank him for receiving a delegation to discuss the organisation's future structure and seek his assurance that, before reaching final conclusions, he will take into account all representations made during the consultation period?
Mr. Hamilton : Yes. First, I commend my hon. Friend's tireless efforts to ensure that Portsmouth remains a substantial naval base--which it certainly will. It is a matter of great regret that we had to re-examine the whole question of our dockyard capability, and that that has led to the proposal to close the FMRO in Portsmouth. We shall look hard at all the representations made before reaching any conclusions and I am glad that we were able to extend the consultation period.
Mr. Foulkes : Does the Minister recall that on 24 November, in reply to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline, West (Ms. Squire), he promised an announcement on dockyards and bases by the end of last year? As the continuing delay results in wild speculation from all quarters, and in great uncertainty and extreme concern among the work forces at both Rosyth and Devonport, will the Minister now accept that the dual site solution is the better one, not just for jobs in Scotland and the west country but for strategic reasons? Will he now bite the bullet and tell us that an announcement will be made quickly?
Mr. Hamilton : I apologise to the hon. Gentleman and to the House that it was not possible to make an announcement by the end of the year. Further representations were made on the viability of the dockyards and it was important to examine that information carefully before reaching any conclusions. I am rather reluctant to promise the hon. Gentleman another date, but I hope that we shall be able to make an announcement shortly.
Mr. Ward : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the surface ships belonging to the Royal Navy in Portsmouth
Column 758
will be joined at some date by two new amphibious assault ships which were promised during the previous Parliament? Can my right hon. Friend give us some idea when they are likely to be placed on order?Mr. Hamilton : Yes, indeed. A project definition is being drawn up in connection with the replacement of both the amphibious assault ships, with the objective that we should go out to tender later this year.
Unaccompanied Tours
10. Mr. Trimble : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the average interval between unaccompanied tours (a) two years ago, (b) one year ago and (c) currently.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The average interval between unaccompanied tours for the infantry in 1990-91 was 18 months. That figure rose to 32 months in 1991-92 as, among other measures, Royal Marine commandos were included, and has fallen to 17 months in 1992-93 due to the unavailability of those units undergoing amalgamation, changing roles or relocating. It is still expected, however, that the target of 24 months between unaccompanied tours will be achieved once restructuring is complete.
Mr. Trimble : I appreciate that it is hoped that it will be possible to get back to 24 months at some point in the future, but when does the Minister think that that target will be achieved? Is it not likely that in the short term--over the next few years--the figure will still be low and may even drop further? Does the Minister appreciate the impact that that will have on the families of service men? If the pressure on the men and their families is sustained, we may have a vicious circle in which more men leave the service.
Mr. Hamilton : Yes. The period of amalgamation will be over the next two years. That has led to the present dislocation and to the emergency tour interval shrinking to the degree that it has recently. So long as there are no new long-term commitments in the next two years, we estimate that we shall be able to return to 24 months. I totally agree with the hon. Gentleman's point about the effect of the amalgamation on families, and we are mindful of that.
Mr. Fabricant : A number of reports in The Scotsman and other newspapers have said that there may be a reprieve possibly for some Scottish regiments. Can my right hon. Friend reassure me and my constituents that any review of Scottish regiments will go hand in glove with the review of the Staffordshire and Cheshire regiments?
Mr. Hamilton : I do not think that we are talking about a review of the proposals for the amalgamation of regiments under "Options for Change". We still feel that we have the right number of regiments. We do not think that long-term commitments have changed sufficiently to want to change that.
Skills Base
12. Mr. Barnes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will outline measures he proposes to take to minimise the erosion of the skills base in the defence industry ; and if he will make a statement.
Column 759
Mr. Rifkind : It is for companies operating in the defence business to decide how to preserve and foster the skills that they judge are required to fulfil current and future defence contracts at home and overseas.
Mr. Barnes : That means that the Minister is again sitting back and watching the destruction of skills in British industry--in this case, defence--which are of a high level and should be developed by the Government rather than destroyed. Last week, it was announced that 1, 300 jobs were to go in Royal Ordnance factories. Why do the Government not start intervening in such industries and provide back-up and support so that there may be diversification and conversion into other industries? We have had enough of Governments being free-enterprise freaks.
Mr. Rifkind : I pointed out a few moments ago that British defence industries have been successful in increasing their market share from 17 per cent. of the world market to 20 per cent. That is a remarkable achievement and shows that the defence industries are capable of adapting to the new international situation.
Mr. Trotter : May I remind my right hon. and learned Friend of the need to maintain our shipbuilding base and of the importance to that base of ordering the landing platform helicopter carrier? The Select Committee on Defence was recently told by an official in his Department that that requirement remained essential. Can my right hon. and learned Friend give an assurance that the Government's commitment to order the LPH carrier will be maintained?
Mr. Rifkind : I am aware of my hon. Friend's great interest in the ordering of the LPH carrier. The tenders for that particular ship have been received, and they are currently being analysed. However, that will inevitably take some time.
Mr. Nicholas Brown : Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to deny categorically the rumour that he intends to cancel the LPH carrier project, and confirm that he will make a firm procurement decision in the autumn?
Mr. Rifkind : I have just told the House that we are currently considering the tenders for the order.
Bosnia
13. Mr. Sweeney : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much food has been delivered by British troops in Bosnia since their deployment.
Mr. Rifkind : So far, 147 convoys have been escorted by British troops, delivering 11,775 tonnes of humanitarian aid.
Mr. Sweeney : Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that the British troops are performing a valuable humanitarian role in Bosnia and does he consider that the present rules of engagement provide adequate protection for our troops in Bosnia?
Mr. Rifkind : I agree that the British troops are carrying out an enormously important role. The importance of their role is measured by the success of the vast number of convoys that have reached their destinations. We are equally concerned that British soldiers in Bosnia should
Column 760
have the means to protect themselves, and the rules of engagement have been designed to ensure that they are able to achieve that objective.
| Next Section
| Home Page |