| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Cadet Forces
4. Mr. Bob Russell (Colchester): If he will increase the level of funding for cadet forces. [90201]
The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr. Doug Henderson): The Government are fully committed to the cadet forces. As I have already announced, we are increasing our expenditure on the cadet forces by £3 million over the next four financial years. Up to £12 million is also being made available to provide necessary alternative accommodation for those units affected by Territorial Army restructuring.
Mr. Russell: Does the Minister accept that there has been a steady decline in the number of cadets in recent years? Does he accept that in real-terms funding, £3 million over four years is not a lot? Does he agree that the cadet movement is a recruiting ground for the armed forces? As recruitment is not currently hitting the required targets, does he agree that more investment in our cadets would mean more people entering our armed forces, as well as dovetailing with the policies of the Secretary of State for Education and Employment on the new deal and on wider education, and with the Home Secretary's policies on tackling youth crime, as it would provide young people with more productive ways to occupy their time?
Mr. Henderson: I am glad to hear the hon. Gentleman identify exactly the position reached by the Government in the strategic defence review. We recognise the historic importance of the cadets, the value of continuing their activities and recruitment, and the need to add extra money to the cadet budget so that the service may develop for the good of both the community and the armed forces.
Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire): The Minister seems content to believe that the closure of 87 Territorial
Army centres across Britain will have no effect on the cadet force. On 31 March 1998, there were 124,752 cadets in the UK. How many are there today?
Mr. Henderson: I will be happy to look at the precise figures. I again assure the House that, when the Territorial Army restructuring was introduced--that exercise was widely welcomed and has been a success--an absolute guarantee was given that the same level of provision for cadets would be available after the restructuring as before it.
Iraq
5. Mr. Clive Efford (Eltham): How many British service personnel are currently involved in helping to patrol the no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq. [90202]
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. George Robertson): We currently have just over 1,000 British service personnel involved in the mission in support of United Nations Security Council resolution 688 to prevent Saddam's air force from persecuting the Kurds and Shi'a Muslims of northern and southern Iraq.
Mr. Efford: Does my right hon. Friend agree that we should not forget the very difficult task that those Air Force pilots are performing in protecting the no-fly zones? Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that every check and balance has been put in place to ensure that pilots are targeting only those targets that would secure the no-fly zones, and that every effort is being made to protect innocent Iraqi civilians and Air Force pilots?
Mr. Robertson: I can give that assurance. British and American responses to attacks on alliance planes are strictly limited to proportionate defensive action against Iraqi weapons and facilities that pose a threat to our aircraft.
Let me be blunt: Saddam is out to kill our pilots and navigators. That has been his relentless intention since the end of Operation Desert Fox. More than 190 Iraqi aircraft have violated the no-fly zones and there have been more than 260 other direct threats against our aircrews, including missile attacks and heavy anti-aircraft artillery fire. Saddam has even offered a bounty for shooting down an aircraft. So long as Saddam and his forces continue to threaten the lives of our aircrews, we reserve the right to take action in self defence--and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Robert Key (Salisbury):
In turning once again to this important unfinished business, will the Secretary of State confirm whether there is any intention to withdraw British forces from the operation? Does he agree that it is in Britain's national interest that there should be stability in the area? Does he further agree that, in addition to targeting British pilots, Saddam and his regime are responsible for killing large numbers of Iraqi people on the ground--and that is why we are there? Given that Saddam is still killing--indeed, executing--100 people a week in southern Iraq alone, does that not justify our continued presence in the area on behalf of the United Nations?
Mr. Robertson:
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We have no intention of giving up what is an
Our aircrews patrol the no-fly zones daily in the humanitarian interests of the people on the ground and, day by day, our aircrews are under attack. They take their lives in their hands when they conduct those missions. Our aircrews exhibit professionalism and skill, and they should receive the backing of the whole country--as I am sure they do.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North):
If the reports are true, one certainly regrets the loss of any civilian lives arising from the attacks. Can more be done to get the point across in the middle east about why we are involved in the no-fly zones, why the patrols began and why it is necessary that they continue? Is it not the case--as the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key), pointed out--that Saddam Hussein is a most notorious mass murderer and is about the last person on earth from whom we should take lectures about the loss of innocent lives?
Mr. Robertson:
We take great care over the targeting that is involved in these missions. We would regret any loss of civilian lives, but we should treat with great caution reports emanating at any time from Saddam's propaganda machine about possible civilian casualties. In fact, Saddam has resorted recently to indiscriminate fire using surface-to-surface rockets as improvised anti- aircraft weapons and is putting civilians on the ground at risk. Some of the casualties that he has reported occurred on days when allied planes did not fly, and they were undoubtedly caused by some of his troops on the ground. As I say, when he stops trying to kill our aircrew, we shall no longer have any reason to act against the missile sites that cause the problem.
Dr. Julian Lewis (New Forest, East):
The Secretary of State is well aware that I support the Government's tough line on Saddam Hussein, but I am doubtful about the efficacy of air power alone in combating his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. In the light of the lessons of the conflict in Kosovo, and the limitations shown by that conflict as to the ability of air power alone to ensure the destruction of individual, hardened targets, has the Secretary of State made any reassessments? What lessons has he drawn on the efficacy of using air power alone to degrade Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological warfare capabilities?
Mr. Robertson:
The campaign in Kosovo showed the potential of air power and the potential of the precision attacks that took place there. In many ways, those precision attacks were modelled on what we had to do in the no-fly zones when allied aircraft came under attack. We have to combine the policing of the no-fly zones with a robust diplomatic offensive. That is why Britain has tabled a draft resolution in the United Nations Security Council, co-sponsored by Argentina, Bahrain, Brazil, the Netherlands and Slovenia. That shows how the UN could respond, and respond robustly, to the three reports that were commissioned by the Security Council--the first on a re-engagement with Iraq; the second on humanitarian
6. Ms Rachel Squire (Dunfermline, West):
What progress has been made in his Department's plans to procure two new aircraft carriers. [90204]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. John Spellar):
Bids have been received from two industrial teams for the next phase of the programme, which will develop overall design proposals. The bids are currently being evaluated and contract placement is planned for this autumn. The procurement strategy thereafter sees bids for the demonstration and manufacture phase scheduled for 2003; contract placement will then take place in 2004, following ministerial decision. As part of that, on 16 August, Mr. Ali Baghaei will be appointed as the integrated project team leader for the project. We have made it clear to the teams that the ships will be built in British yards. We will be in a position to make a further statement on the project in the autumn.
Ms Squire:
I very much welcome my hon. Friend's statement that future carriers will be built in a British yard. Will he confirm that Kvaerner Govan will be able to compete, along with other UK yards, for the work to build those carriers? Does he agree that, until those carriers are built, it is vital that we maintain the present condition of our aircraft carriers? Will he join me in praising the high standard of workmanship of the work force at Rosyth royal dockyard, who are currently carrying out a refit on HMS Ark Royal? Is that not a clear lesson that it is in the interests of the people of Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom if they want to secure a future for their yards?
Mr. Spellar:
I thank my hon. Friend for that well-made last point. I join her in welcoming the announcement last week on the future of Kvaerner Govan and the tremendous work that is being undertaken by the work force, the companies and our colleagues in the Scottish Office. She rightly drew attention to the fact that Kvaerner Govan is one of the potential yards for the future carrier. However, I must mention that there are other contenders--Harland and Wolff, Barrow, Cammell Laird at Birkenhead and Swan Hunter.
I join my hon. Friend in her tribute to the work at Rosyth on the refit of Ark Royal. That demonstrates, once again, the considerable shipbuilding and ship-repairing skills of this country; they will provide a strong future for the industry and for the Royal Navy.
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough):
The Minister will recall that, under the strategic defence review, the Government announced that the Invincible class carriers would be replaced with two new carriers in 2012 and 2015. Is that still the Government's intention? What sort of aircraft is it intended to fly from those carriers?
Mr. Spellar:
Yes, I can confirm that that is still our intention and that it is consistent with the dates I announced previously. There are several potential
Mr. Syd Rapson (Portsmouth, North):
You will be aware, Madam Speaker, that I represent part of Portsmouth where we have a great interest in the two new aircraft carriers--not in building them, but in maintenance and berthing. Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware of the excellent facilities in Portsmouth? He will know of the firm FSL--Fleet Support Ltd.--which he managed to formulate by a shrewd decision early last year involving Vosper Thornycroft and GEC. We are very capable of looking after the carriers in the long term and we wish good luck to the company that gets to build them.
Mr. Spellar:
Perhaps, Madam Speaker, you would like to add to your duties that of chief auctioneer receiving bids on this matter. My hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline, West (Ms Squire) and my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North (Mr. Rapson) rightly draw attention to the excellent facilities and the supremely skilled work forces in both their local facilities and others around the country. We are lucky to have them, and they will all be evaluated in future for construction, maintenance and refit purposes.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |