| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sierra Leone
12. Mr. David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds): What recent representations he has received regarding deployment of United Kingdom armed forces in Sierra Leone. [122650]
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): I have received a number of representations from a variety of sources, including right hon. and hon. Members,
regarding the deployment of our armed forces in Sierra Leone. I am sure that the House will want to join me in sending congratulations to those members of the forces who have been and continue to be deployed in Sierra Leone, on the skill and professionalism they have shown.
Mr. Ruffley: I am sure the House will concur with the Secretary of State's views on the excellent job that our service men and women are doing in Sierra Leone.
Can he tell us how many serving British soldiers are in Sierra Leone at present? Does he believe that he will be able to pull them out by Christmas?
Mr. Hoon: There are up to 4,000 British forces in and around Sierra Leone--not all of them are deployed on the ground; a number are in ships offshore. I make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that we remain absolutely committed to our timetable for withdrawing the bulk of UK forces currently in Sierra Leone by mid-June.
Mr. Martin Bell (Tatton): May I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Kurt Schork? He was a brave and brilliant writer-journalist who was ambushed and killed in Sierra Leone two weeks ago, and his death causes me to wonder whether the Secretary of State is satisfied with the idea that a substantial contingent of troops are out there without any significant armour to protect them.
Mr. Hoon: I am confident--relying on the military advice that I have received--that the forces deployed in Sierra Leone are appropriate for the job that has been undertaken, and that they continue to undertake.
Mr. Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green): Given the nature of recent speculation about changes to the profile of British armed forces in Sierra Leone--especially the idea that 300 Royal Anglians may find themselves substituting in the role currently being undertaken by the Marines--will the Secretary of State take this opportunity categorically to deny that any such deployment is being considered? Does the plan for withdrawal remain that, hopefully--give or take one or two slight problems--the Government will withdraw British troops by mid-June?
Mr. Hoon: I make it clear, as I did in answer to the substantive question, that we remain absolutely committed to the timetable of withdrawing the bulk of UK forces by the middle of June.
However, we have always made clear to the Government of Sierra Leone our commitment to training in that country. As long ago as 27 March, the Prime Minister announced longer-term assistance to the Government of Sierra Leone in the form of a UK-led international military advisory and training team. Ultimately, we expect that that training team will consist of about 90 people, with the UK providing half the total. To ensure that the training team gets under way effectively, we are considering deploying a team from the UK for about six weeks from the middle of June. However, I make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that it will not substitute for the Marines in any way; it will provide training.
Mr. John Swinney (North Tayside): After the Secretary of State's most recent statement to the House
on Sierra Leone, has he given any further consideration to the way in which arms can be provided to the Sierra Leone Government without jeopardising matters or intensifying the conflict?
Mr. Hoon: Further to the answer that I have already given, we have for some time been concerned about the lack of effective training available to the armed forces of the Government of Sierra Leone. It thus follows that, in providing training, we believe it appropriate that those trained troops should have access to weapons. I announced that decision to the House about two weeks ago. If we are providing effective training, it seems sensible that those forces should have weapons to accompany it.
Smart Procurement
13. Mr. Brian Jenkins (Tamworth): What savings have been identified as a result of the smart procurement initiative. [122651]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Dr. Lewis Moonie): As part of the strategic defence review, we set ourselves a target of saving £2 billion on equipment procurement expenditure over the 10 years to 2007-08 through the introduction of smart procurement. We are on track to achieve that target in that the sum of cost reductions identified and made in successive planning rounds is approaching the £2 billion mark, and, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's announcement last month about the strategic air lift and future missile for the Eurofighter aptly demonstrates, we are delivering the programme set out in the strategic defence review.
Mr. Jenkins: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. However, is he aware that, according to the National Audit Office, the Government inherited a cost overrun of £3 billion and a three-year delay in the Ministry of Defence's 25 most expensive projects? When he considers the strategic defence review and present commitments, will he undertake to the country and to our defence services that he will take no advice from the Conservative party, which proved itself incapable of handling the defence finances of this country?
Dr. Moonie: I share my hon. Friend's shock and dismay at the incompetence of the previous Administration, of which he has given us another dismal example. I certainly agree with him that smart procurement will deliver real savings while preserving our capacity to meet the challenging targets of the strategic defence review.
Madam Speaker: I call Mr. Bercow.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): Question 16, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I was calling the hon. Gentleman on question 13. I shall call the hon. Member for Lichfield (Mr. Fabricant) instead.
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): Thank you, Madam Speaker. Given that the F22 fighter in the
United States, which is similar to the Eurofighter, has had to be equipped with a cannon, surely it is not very smart not to fit a gun to the Eurofighter.
Dr. Moonie: All such decisions are taken on the basis of advice from the armed forces concerned. I agree with you, Madam Speaker, in that I, too, find it difficult to distinguish between those two hon. Gentlemen.
Madam Speaker: I do not, actually.
Former Yugoslavia
14. Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington): What contribution UK forces are making to security in former Yugoslavia. [122652]
The Minister for the Armed Forces (Mr. John Spellar): We, together with our partner nations participating in the KFOR mission in Kosovo, face a challenging security situation. Ethnic intimidation and violence continue, albeit often orchestrated by a small number of extremists without the support of the majority of the population. However, British forces, along with our allies and partners in KFOR, are making a major contribution to solving those problems and the security situation is improving. British forces undertake a wide range of tasks designed to reassure and protect minorities while continuing to encourage refugees to return to their homes. They also provide support to non-governmental organisations, international organisations and other governmental bodies throughout Kosovo, helping to secure a safe, multi-ethnic and democratic society. Currently, we have some 3,500 troops in Multinational Brigade Centre in KFOR.
In Bosnia, SFOR provides a stabilising presence, allowing for civilian reconstruction and the return of refugees and internally displaced persons to a secure and peaceful environment. Currently, we have some 2,700 troops in SFOR, primarily based in Multinational Division South West, and will reduce this to some 2,000 by the end of this year.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: That was a very interesting answer. Will my hon. Friend pass on the appreciation of the House of Commons, expressed at Question Time today, to all our troops in the former Yugoslavia for the courageous effort that they are making in trying to keep the peace in very difficult conditions? However, will he also tell us whether it is true that some countries are not pulling their weight in terms of protecting the Serbs?
Mr. Spellar: I shall be pleased to pass on that appreciation. Indeed, I was able to do just that when I met some of our forces in Pristina on Wednesday and Thursday last week. They are doing an excellent and professional job and playing a considerable role in many areas to help to reconstruct the country.
Sometimes, the cause of peace in Kosovo is not best served by the media, which focus very much on the areas in which there are difficulties and ignore the wider picture. Not only are many refugees returning, but there is greater stability, and, equally important, the reconstruction of economic life is taking place. Our forces are playing a major role in helping to reintroduce a proper
system of law and order. Indeed, 56 MOD police are due to fly out this week to reinforce the international police effort, to which the Royal Ulster Constabulary has already contributed considerably. As my hon. Friend says, we pay tribute to the work being undertaken, but we also recognise that there is some way to go.
Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East): Has the Minister seen any sign that the dwindling band of Serbs in Kosovo is likely to enjoy security and safety after the troops withdrawal?
Mr. Spellar: First, I must correct the hon. Gentleman, as some Serbs are returning from Serbia, not least because of the problems in that country. When I was in Pristina, it was a pleasure to talk to members of our forces who are playing a significant role in protecting Serbs, both individually and in groups. That situation is not ideal. It is by no means perfect, but it is certainly better than a year or so ago. At the same time, people in that country are starting to establish a pattern of co-existence. As I said in response to the previous question, we should examine positive developments. We should not ignore, underestimate, or fail to take action on negative elements, but we must get them into perspective and achieve a balance.
Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North): I fully supported the action in Kosovo. Indeed, everything seems to have justified what was done by the international community, which includes this country. Will further action be taken to try to secure protection for those Serbians who are undoubtedly being harassed and persecuted by ethnic Albanians? Does my hon. Friend agree that further arrests of those responsible would give the Serbians far greater confidence that Kosovo is as much their part of the world as it is that of the ethnic Albanians?
Mr. Spellar: That is very much the message from our forces, who, as I said, are playing a significant role in providing protection. Ultimately, that is not a substitute for a proper system of policing and law and order. We are making a contribution to policing, but penal institutions in Kosovo must be enhanced, and the judicial system must be reinforced. My hon. Friend is right to say that actions outside the law must be arrestable and punishable. Again, I am not saying that we have achieved a perfect solution, but we have made considerable progress.
Mr. Paul Keetch (Hereford): I endorse what the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) said about the importance of British forces in the former Yugoslavia. However, does the Minister agree that the situation is still very tense? Last Friday, a car on a British-controlled road just outside Pristina hit a land mine, killing two men and injuring a woman and two young children. What credence does the Minister give to reports from the United States that America may consider withdrawing its troops from Kosovo? Does he agree that the presence of US forces on the ground in Kosovo is an important contribution to KFOR? As we approach the first anniversary of the UN mandate in Kosovo, does he accept that the withdrawal of US troops would send a very bad signal indeed?
Mr. Spellar: We need to see in place the right number of troops from all countries. We also need a broad spread
of forces in a range of international operations, and countries must fulfil their commitments. The way in which international forces are working together in Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina is an example of that, and has developed well.The hon. Gentleman mentioned the former Yugoslavia, and it is important that we focus on the steady progress in Bosnia-Herzegovina, not least the electoral support for moving away from sectarian parties towards centre parties. A lot of that has been driven by encouraging developments in Croatia, such as the election of a leadership that wants to be part of the European household and consequently is examining how to modernise its own country, and putting considerable pressure on Bosnia- Herzegovina to withdraw support from extremists.
As has been recognised, all that requires an on-going international presence which, yet again, is having an impact, creating co-existence and starting to encourage those who want to play a positive role in the reconstruction of their countries--as opposed to those who merely seek sectarian division--so that they can start to advance. That is progress, but there is still a long way to go.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |