| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Shaw: Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: No, no. The hon. Member for Sheffield, Hillsborough (Mrs. Jackson) seldom raises a point of order, and it is quite a sensible one, in connection with data protection. I am sure that the hon. Lady will understand that it is not a matter for me what individual Members, including the Prime Minister, do. That does not relate to the Chair.
Madam Speaker: Is it a separate point of order? Is it a sensible point of order? [Laughter.] That is the point. Is it sensible as well as separate?
Mr. Shaw: I must, as always, Madam Speaker, leave you to judge that point. As you know, I always respect your judgment on such matters.
6 Feb 1997 : Column 1156
I want to draw attention to the fact that, although a particular matter has been raised in connection with the Prime Minister, it is more important to raise the fact that the Leader of the Opposition frequently writes to many people all over the country. We are concerned about whether he uses House of Commons resources for writing those letters to people--
Madam Speaker:
Order. The hon. Gentleman must resume his seat. He now seems to be generalising. It is matter of quid pro quo. Nobody writes to me, and I am very pleased that they do not.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Select Committee on European Legislation deals with hundreds of documents, and part of its procedures is to determine whether European documents, directives and regulations have legal or political significance. If they have such significance, the Committee may recommend that they be debated either in Committee or on the Floor of the House. Should that not also apply to the pay review body documents, so that we can determine whether they have legal or political significance? If they do, the Prime Minister should surely make a statement so that we can question him on the seven documents.
Madam Speaker:
I think that that is a point of view rather than a point of order.
Let me correct something that I said earlier. I said that nobody ever writes to me, but I do not want that to be misunderstood. Hundreds and hundreds of people write to me--mostly about points of order and noise in this House, which is not appreciated by the audience outside.
6 Feb 1997 : Column 1157
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. Carrington.]
The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Nicholas Soames):
Madam Speaker, I very much welcome the opportunity to open this afternoon's debate on the Royal Air Force.
It would be inappropriate to open a debate on the RAF without taking the opportunity to pay tribute to the remarkable life and work of Sir Frank Whittle. Throughout his distinguished career in the Royal Air Force and subsequently, Sir Frank's vision and originality were an inspiring example to the service and to the aerospace world. Sir Frank was without doubt one of the giants of aviation. He will be particularly remembered for his invention of the jet engine, which he patented in 1930 when a flying officer of only 23 years of age. It was fitting that the memorial service to honour his life in November was marked by an RAF fly-past of four Tornados from No. 111 squadron, in which Sir Frank served in the 1920s.
On Tuesday, the Government announced that the permanent site for the joint services staff college was to be at Shrivenham. I mention that in this debate because of the importance of staff training to all three services, and especially to the RAF. This decision has rightly been warmly welcomed by all three services. The college will be a centre of military excellence, building on the world renown of its prestigious predecessors to maintain our global reputation for command and staff training.
The Shrivenham site will be ideal for our purposes, and it reflects well on the Government's private finance initiative that such an innovative solution has been put forward. There is, of course, regret at the closure of the existing colleges at Greenwich, Camberley and Bracknell, but I believe that its establishment on a green-field site will allow the new college to develop its own distinctive character and ethos.
Until the permanent college is ready for operation in September 1999, the joint services staff college will operate at interim sites--mainly Bracknell for all three services, where the college came into being on 1 January this year and where the first new course will start in September 1997. Although the facilities there will be temporary, they will be fit for the purpose. Significant efforts are currently being focused on providing the necessary accommodation and the syllabuses are being worked out to reflect the new joint training course.
The House may care to note the strong support that the Government have received from, among others, John Keegan--possibly the most distinguished of our defence commentators. Not known for mincing his words when he thinks we are doing the wrong thing, he has picked out some of the most crucial characteristics of both the JSSC as a concept and the Shrivenham solution. We believe that he is right and that it will transform the concept of general staff training. We believe that it will promise very high standards, much greater tri-service integration and an imaginative and highly relevant syllabus. I can do no better than describe our vision for the new JSSC and its permanent home as, in John Keegan's words, "a sensation."
6 Feb 1997 : Column 1158
It is men such as Frank Whittle who have shaped the Royal Air Force into what it is today: a dynamic, thoroughly professional, forward looking, innovative service, capable of projecting air power around the globe. Before turning to the RAF's achievements since our last debate, I would like to say a few words about military power from the air--known to some as air power.
All three of our armed services possess a significant capability to conduct air power operations. Before I go on to talk about that, I should like to remind the House that, as Churchill said,
I should like to mention three aspects that I consider important. The first, and perhaps the most obvious, is the ability, through control of the air, to conduct military operations free from attack by enemy air forces. From D-day to the Gulf, mastery of the air has been a key factor in the success of our armed forces in achieving their objectives, and one that no military planner can afford to ignore.
The second aspect of air power that I should like to touch on is the unique ability to project enormous destructive power swiftly, smashing an enemy's war-fighting capability. Modern air power embodies one of the most potent instruments of military force, capable of exacting unacceptable levels of punishment upon those unfortunate, or unwise, enough to have to experience its consequences.
We need look no further for a graphic example of those qualities than the war in the Gulf. Indeed, on this day six years ago, Royal Air Force Tornados and Buccaneers were engaged on operations as part of the great coalition over Iraq, attacking highway bridges on the Iraqi supply routes to Kuwait using laser-guided bombs. Meanwhile, other Tornado formations attacked airfields, training camps and power plants. Our Jaguars simultaneously sought out and attacked artillery positions. The effect on Saddam Hussein's war-fighting capability, in terms of materiel, communications and, crucially, morale, was totally devastating.
The precision and strength of air power find expression in the new strategic setting in which we exist today through the deterrence of aggressors and the enforcement of United Nations authority. It was air power, through the delivery of limited, precisely targeted force, that helped to bring the warring factions in the former Yugoslavia to the negotiating table in Dayton.
This day in 1933, Squadron Leader Gayford and Flight Lieutenant Nicholetts left RAF Cranwell in a long-range Fairy Aviation monoplane and flew non-stop to Walvis Bay, South West Africa. In so doing, they flew 5,431 miles in 57 hours and 25 minutes, establishing the world distance record. That then fantastic feat illustrates a third key aspect of air power: its reach.
Today, we exploit that capability in our support to peacekeeping, disaster relief, and humanitarian and military operations. The RAF has been to the fore in every recent military operation with which the United Kingdom has been associated. Its speed of deployment, reach and inherent flexibility make it ideally suited to react to the very broadest range of contingencies. In the fast-moving
6 Feb 1997 : Column 1159
Mr. Andrew Faulds (Warley, East):
The Minister has been arguing about the efficacy of air power, which none of us would dispute. Why were the Government so reluctant to use this very impressive weapon in the Bosnian situation? Why were they so reluctant, when others were urging such actions upon us?
4.14 pm
"Air power is the most difficult of all forms of military force to measure, or even to express in precise terms".
That was true in 1940, and remains so today; it is a reflection of air power's myriad roles.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |