Previous SectionIndexHome Page


5.42 pm

Mr. Eric Martlew (Carlisle): Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for calling me--I was starting to worry whether every hon. Member in the Chamber would be able to speak. I am a bit of an old lag at these debates, and noted that one or two hon. Members said that today's debate is poorly attended. Based on my experience, I think that it is better attended than many previous armed forces debates. On one occasion, when I was the then Opposition spokesman, I spoke for an hour, and subsequently received a letter from our Chief Whip asking why I had talked for so long. I told him that no one was on our Back Benches, so that I had to speak for an hour. That situation does not apply to this debate.

The right hon. Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King)--who has left the Chamber--was rather unfair to the Secretary of State for Defence by commenting on his absence from the debate. I have made inquiries, and discovered that he is attending the opening of the Scottish Parliament. If one considers the contribution that the Scots have made over the years to our forces, one might expect him to be there. He is also a Scottish Member. I therefore hope that the criticism might be retracted.

Many Opposition Members have spoken today about overstretch. Perhaps we should not go into the history of the overstretch issue, because when I was an Opposition Member I used to speak about it, too. Quite recently, however, current Opposition Members--especially the current Leader of the Opposition--made one demand after another for preparation of a land task force to invade Kosovo. They certainly made no mention of how such a task force would overstretch our forces. Regardless, the Government were right that we did not need a land task force, and we achieved our objectives by bombing. Such a task force would have caused tremendous overstretch.

After demanding more forces for Kosovo only a few months ago, it is not right for Opposition Members now to be carping about overstretch. The hon. Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key) shakes his head, but a land task force would have required many more soldiers.

Mr. Key: I should, for the record, make it clear that the Opposition stayed absolutely alongside the Government on the issue. The Government told us that they did not want an invasion force. We said, "All right--you have the information; we don't--we trust you."

Mr. Martlew: I am sorry, but that is not my recollection. I remember the Leader of the Opposition

1 Jul 1999 : Column 516

demanding of the Prime Minister that we took a decision by June to send in a task force otherwise the winter would be upon us, so the hon. Gentleman is wrong.

I should like to say a lot of good things about what the Government have done, but I am conscious of time so I shall concentrate on overstretch.

To some extent I am a delegate here today as I have made a commitment to the families of the King's Own Royal Border Regiment to express some of their views and concerns. During Defence questions recently, I asked my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State whether the regiment would be sent to Bosnia for the second consecutive Christmas. Fortunately, my right hon. Friend gave me the right answer. Following that reply, some soldiers' wives contacted me and we arranged a meeting at the Catterick garrison. Many of their concerns have already been mentioned today. They appreciated the fact that my hon. Friend the Minister for the Armed Forces had taken the time to see them, but as they are rather sceptical about politicians, they were not too impressed by some of his answers. I am sure that they were no more impressed with mine.

One problem relates to accommodation. I have the general impression that privatising the accommodation has not worked. The senior officers are glad that it was done as it is now no longer their problem, but there is still a great deal of substandard accommodation, some of it in Catterick.

Although the telephone allowance has increased from three minutes to 10 minutes--and that is welcome--there are still problems. After all, how many hon. Members phone home for only 10 minutes a week, and many of us go home at weekends? We have to consider the advances in mobile phones and the fact that they can be used in most parts of Europe. The Minister mentioned the use of the internet and I presume that he was also referring to e-mail, which is another welcome development. The King's Own Royal Border Regiment used it in Macedonia, but it was cut off without any explanation and that created problems for the families.

The worst problem is overstretch. The families wanted me to raise the matter earlier, but when problems arose in Kosovo, they told me that they wanted to be seen to be totally behind their husbands and fathers who were in Macedonia at the time. They are committed to the regiment and we often take their loyalty for granted. However, the regiment has been abroad for much of the past two years. It is in great demand and whenever there is a problem, it seems to be involved. Instead of being sent on one tour in 24 months, they are more likely to be sent on two tours in 18 months. That affects the morale of the troops and their families and increases the work load of those left behind. There is no doubt that when soldiers are sent abroad, those who are left have to double up and their families are also put under pressure.

The statistics for my local regiment are interesting. Between April and December 1998 it recruited 42 soldiers, but lost 48. Although the regiment has a good recruitment record, retention is still poor. The best retention record in the Army is a unit that recruited 127 soldiers and lost 70. In the worst example, 34 were recruited and 74 lost.

Statistics also show the effect of separation on families. From September 1997 to March 1999, the battalion has experienced eight divorces, and 17 more are pending.

1 Jul 1999 : Column 517

Reasons given include the general pressure of service life, but in nine cases, current operational deployment hasbeen specifically cited as a cause. Accommodation and education are problems for families, as is health care. Finding national health service dental treatment is difficult for everyone, but it is especially so for service families who are not allowed forces' dentistry.

Anyone who needs hospital treatment and who moves to a new area will go to the bottom of the new waiting list, and I am glad that the Minister will say something further on that. The military hospital at Catterick is being closed. There will be new facilities at Northallerton, but closure is a blow to forces' families. Buses are infrequent, and someone from Catterick who has a family member in hospital at Northallerton will find it hard to see him or her.

Women want careers of their own. There are two types of service family--the traditional forces families who follow the flag, and families in which the woman has a career and in which, to some extent, the husband's job is just a job. The armed forces must adjust to changing society. One simple point could be addressed. If a husband moves, the wife is not allowed jobseeker's allowance if she is deemed to have given up her job voluntarily. That does not seem right, and I hope that the Minister will think about it. We must address social change in a changing world. We have not yet fully accepted the change in women's roles. Change has been accepted within the Army, but not externally, and we must rethink our approach.

I have asked the Opposition about their attitude to homosexuals in the armed forces, but have had no reply. Are they opposed to allowing homosexuals to join the forces? I believe that homosexuals should be allowed to join. The current bar is discriminatory, and we should do away with it as soon as possible. If a vote is called on the matter in the House of Commons, will Conservative Members be allowed a free vote?

Families tell me that the Government must deal with the serious problem of overstretch. We must decide whether we should increase our armed forces. If we do not, and if there is another crisis somewhere in the world, the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister will have to conclude that, even if we would like to help, we do not have the forces to do so. We cannot continue as we are. The Chief of the Defence Staff cannot continue to say that we can cope in the short term, but that the Army will be overstretched in the medium term. That will affect the morale of the forces, and people will leave them.

5.54 pm

Mr. Martin Bell (Tatton): I plan to make the shortest speech of the debate, but I have a few points to make, particularly while the Minister is in his place. I welcomed his announcement about the promised Guards service. I did not entirely welcome his next statement--that the Ministry of Defence police has a future. It does not deserve a future. It is unaccountable and out of control, as the Minister will see if he studies the Stankovic case.

For 20 months, the police investigated that case. The man has been cleared, because there is no evidence against him--and still he is under a cloud of suspicion. This is the man who should be alongside his commandant General Jackson in Kosovo--he is the man who is needed. It is the greatest single scandal affecting any serving soldier, sailor or air man in the term of office of this Government, and I wish the Government would address it.

1 Jul 1999 : Column 518

I spend a lot of time with soldiers at Army seminars, regimental dinners and the like. I know that the Ministry of Defence police is held in contempt by the armed services--and nor is the force admired by other police forces. I welcome the forthcoming inquiry by the Defence Committee. I hope that the committee will call the chief constable, Walter Boreham, and Major Stankovic.

I have in past years spent a lot of time beside serving soldiers on unaccompanied tours of duty. I know their fears, I know their hopes and I know the pressures that they are under. I know that it was routine for a battalion in Bosnia at the end of a six-month tour to count among its casualties not only its dead and wounded but the 10 per cent. or more of its marriages.

The MOD does not keep--or, at least, does not announce--the figures for divorces in the armed services. An example was brought to my attention yesterday concerning the Light Dragoons, who bore the greater part of the burden of light reconnaissance in Bosnia and underwent seven tours of duty. There were 85 divorces--in a formation of much less than battalion strength. That is a good index or measure of the crisis facing our armed forces.

Routinely in this House we pay tribute to our service men and women. We do that rightly--it is a compliment that is well deserved. However, the best tribute that we could pay them is to make sure that we treat them properly.


Next Section

IndexHome Page