| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Arctic Medal
15. Mr. John Randall (Uxbridge): If the Government will award a medal to British veterans of the Arctic conflict in the second world war. [128432]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Ivor Caplin): Service on the convoys to northern Russia during the second world war was recognised by the award of the Atlantic star. The qualifying criteria, which were published at the time, were quite specific and included service in Arctic waters. I have no plans to revisit that decision.
Mr. Randall : I am rather disappointed by that, and I ask the Minister to reconsider the matter, particularly in view of the welcome announcement of the decision to award a medal to Suez veterans. Perhaps Suez is more on his mind at the moment. Can the Minister give an assurance that veterans awaiting Suez medals will not have to wait several years, as has been reported?
Mr. Caplin: I do not think that it is appropriate to draw a comparison between the two medals. The Suez medal is being awarded following consideration by the honours and decorations committee. Action is being taken to ensure that once final decisions are made on the Suez medal, those awards—[Interruption.] Perhaps the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) should reflect on what the Speaker often says to him: "Keep calm, keep calm." Medals will be made available as soon as possible. I hope that some will be available for Remembrance Sunday; certainly, all will be distributed within the next two years.
Mr. Neil Turner (Wigan): May I say how disappointed I am by my hon. Friend's response? The
climatic conditions imposed unique privations on those who served in the Arctic convoys. Moreover, they faced unique military situations in that they were attacked by forces above the sea, namely the Luftwaffe; on the sea, by German heavy units; and below the sea, by U-boats. The Royal Navy recognised that in the way in which it responded with heavy units of the home fleet, fighting destroyer escorts and escort carriers.None of those was part of the Atlantic forces. May I suggest that my hon. Friend reconsiders the matter and appreciates a unique position that should be honoured by a unique medal for the people who served in those convoys?
Mr. Caplin: I say to my hon. Friend that I do not in any way undermine the role that those men played and their efforts in the second world war. At the time, the commander-in-chief requested a medal, but there was no conclusive evidence that the case was ever fully considered. The honours and decorations committee ultimately made the decision.
Gulf
17. Roger Casale (Wimbledon): What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of logistic support to sustain British forces in the Gulf region. [128434]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Mr. Adam Ingram): The Ministry of Defence is in the middle of a comprehensive analysis to identify lessons from operations in Iraq. That includes an assessment of the effectiveness of logistic support provided to our armed forces across the Gulf region. Our initial findings were published in early July in the MOD report, "Operations in Iraq 2003: First Reflections", copies of which are in the Library. We plan to publish a fuller report before Christmas.
Roger Casale : I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Through involvement in charitable work in Kosovo, I have seen at first hand the logistic support that is provided to British troops in other fields of conflict, and I therefore have every confidence that such support and equipment in the Gulf region and Iraq are remarkably successful, despite press reports to the contrary. However, what is the Ministry of Defence doing to learn lessons quickly from the difficulties and problems that have arisen? What further measures is my right hon. Friend taking to improve logistic support for our troops?
Mr. Ingram: My hon. Friend makes a range of interesting points. He is right that our achievements in a short period—by everyone in the logistic supply chain, whether civilian or military—are remarkable. People excelled themselves and I pay tribute to them.
In my earlier reply, I said that we intended to give a fuller response by Christmas. That should give my hon. Friend encouragement that we will provide an in-depth analysis of what happened, where the weaknesses, if they exist, lie and how we can remedy them.
For the air and land logistic support supply chain, we have put in place a comprehensive study, the "End to End" study, which covers £11.2 billion of expenditure and 105,000 personnel, roughly split 60:40 between military and civilian. It is an intensive study to ensure that everything that we do in the supply chain fulfils the top requirements of the front line. That must be our objective at all times. Iraq will condition our thinking, as previous conflicts have done.
Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham): Does the Minister agree that the availability of logistics depends on that of money? Will he confirm that the enhanced troop enhancements in Iraq run at approximately £200 million a month, on top of the £1 billion already spent, according to the Ministry of Defence? Since the Chancellor's £3 billion war budget is likely to be spent before the end of the financial year, what other defence cuts might have to be made to fund it?
Mr. Ingram: None, because all the money to which the hon. Gentleman referred comes from the reserve. We have made it clear time after time that we are determined to get the job done.
Mr. John Smith (Vale of Glamorgan): May I endorse my right hon. Friend's comments about the success of logistic support in Iraq? I refer particularly to the many examples of British logistic support for our United States allies, especially in southern Iraq, and the Royal Air Force's support for the US air force.
Will my right hon. Friend also acknowledge the invaluable role of third-line reinforcements and the surge capacity within that during the Iraq conflict, and the inherent dangers of pushing it on to operational stations, where there will be no transparency of cost and it will be much more difficult to measure efficiency?
Mr. Ingram: That is a very technical question. I acknowledge my hon. Friend's points, and that is why I referred to the "End to End" study. We must consider the four levels of support that are currently provided. Those lines of support were put in place to deal with a threat different from the one we face now; that was part of our forward-facing posture towards the cold war and the threat that was envisaged.
We have to examine whether what we are doing now is appropriate, which is why I mentioned the size of the budget and the numbers of people involved at all levels. The matter will be subject to full consultation.
I recognise my hon. Friend's constituency interest in the Defence Aviation Repair Agency establishment in St. Athan; this must be the first time that he has asked me a question without mentioning it. I have given him due recognition that I know where he is coming from and I pay tribute to him for all his efforts.
Army (Manning)
18. Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury): What the manning shortfall is in the (a) Regular Army and (b) Territorial Army. [128435]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (
Mr. Ivor Caplin): As at 1 July 2003, regular whole Army strength stood at 102,520, representing a shortfall of 4,220 personnel against the current requirement and Territorial Army strength stood at 37,650, representing a shortfall of 3,550. The Territorial Army strength figures include personnel mobilised in support of operations.
Mr. Brazier : Will the Under-Secretary confirm that we are still five years away from the point at which the Government estimate that the Regular Army will come up to strength? It is not acceptable to shift the desperately heavy burden on the Regular Army still further on to the reserves, in some cases by threatening reservists with a second six-month compulsory call-out when some have done a voluntary six-month call-out before their first compulsory one. The whole House is proud of the territorials who have gone out to serve, including my hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), but there is a limit to how much of the burden reservists can take. The fact is that we do not have enough troops for the jobs the Government are giving them.
Mr. Caplin: I am certainly looking forward to the return of the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne). Recruitment and retention measures introduced by the Government for the Regular Army and the TA are starting to pay dividends, in that we have at last stopped the downward trend in recruitment to both the Army and the TA. That is why strength is now improving.
Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston): Is it not the case, as my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfries (Mr. Brown) said, that recruitment and retention is made worse by some of the scare stories that are put around? Is it not about time that we had responsible comments from the Opposition, although I know that that is not the Under-Secretary's job? Will he join me in praising the work of the Cheshire regiment in attempting to retain and recruit new members for the regiment?
Mr. Caplin: I should be happy to put on record my support for the work of the Cheshire regiment, which does an excellent job. I hope to be in the north-west next month and may well take the opportunity to visit it.
Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk): The Under-Secretary is only too well aware that recruitment and retention into the Regular Army and the TA relies upon those involved having confidence in the MOD and the system in which they are working; in particular, those deployed in the Gulf and elsewhere, and their families, depend on a duty to care. Does the Minister believe that members of our armed forces and their families have been impressed by what has happened at the Hutton inquiry, in which the Secretary of State—
Mr. Speaker: Order. I cannot have every question coming on to the Hutton inquiry. [Interruption.] I am telling the hon. Gentleman. I allowed the hon. Member for Aldershot (Mr. Howarth) to speak on it; perhaps I was a bit slow on the uptake. I am not allowing the question. Does the Minister wish to try to answer?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |