Previous SectionIndexHome Page

Mr. Hain: Obviously, we need to take one thing at a time. The first is to have the Attorney-General's view on how matters should proceed: whether there should be a reference to the Court of Appeal or some other method
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1723
 
of redressing the situation. I, the Government and the Secretary of State fully agree that it is completely unacceptable.

Mr. David Watts (St. Helens, North) (Lab): In the past, my right hon. Friend has promised the House that he would allow Members to discuss the new hours and to review them? Can he set out a timetable for that review?

Mr. Hain: The Modernisation Committee will consider this matter shortly, and I hope that it will begin its review later next month. My hon. Friend will have the opportunity to contribute to it, as will all other Members of the House. We will take into account the welcome review by the Procedure Committee, which sent out a questionnaire to all Members and attracted a high return.

Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con): In the week after the House returns, can we have a statement from the Secretary of State for International Development on the role of the Department for International Development in Iraq? We have had numerous welcome statements from the Secretary of State for Defence, but so far we have not had a single statement from the Secretary of State for International Development. Given that DFID had its budget sliced elsewhere by £100 million to go to Iraq, there has never been an explanation of where that money has gone. With the handover of authority to Iraqis, we hope that we will be in a process of nation building. One would have expected DFID to be at the forefront of all that. It would be helpful to have a better understanding of what DFID's role will be, rather than simply hearing constantly from the Secretary of State for Defence.

Mr. Hain: On that question, the hon. Gentleman will understand that there have been some adjustments to the DFID budget, and properly so, as the situation in Iraq has required that, and the Iraqi people have needed
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1724
 
the assistance that we have secured for them. He will also know that the DFID budget has doubled under this Government, which I am sure that he will welcome, compared with the position under the previous Government whom he supported. Certainly, I will draw the Secretary of State's attention to his points.

Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield) (Lab): May I add my support to the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn) and the hon. Member for North Tayside (Pete Wishart) regarding Mordecai Vanunu and Peter Hounam? As for my business question, can he raise through the appropriate channels, perhaps with a view to a statement after the break, the convention whereby Members are meant to inform each other when they go to each other's constituencies? I ask that because, on Monday, my office received rumours that the Leader of the Opposition was going to visit my constituency the following day. We made inquiries about that, and were told by his office that it knew of no such visit, and that he was going to Birmingham for the motor show.

When I arrived here on Monday evening, I discovered that a note had been placed on the letter board informing me that he was indeed visiting my constituency the following day. I subsequently discovered that it was for a photo call connected with a threatened post office in the constituency.

As my right hon. Friend knows, I have been involved in a cross-party campaign to defend local services. We would be happy to have the Leader of the Opposition on board for that. Does my right hon. Friend share my fear that either the Leader of the Opposition's office does not know what he is doing, or this was an attempt to make party political advantage out of a local issue?

Mr. Hain: Obviously I cannot comment on the details. There is a convention which we are all required to respect; but I should be astonished if my hon. Friend's constituents felt any relief as a result of a visit from the Leader of the Opposition, given his dreadful record of cuts across the board when his party was in government.
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1723
 

 
27 May 2004 : Column 1725
 

Iraq: UK Forces Adjustments

1.1 pm

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): I should like to make a statement on troop levels in Iraq. Overall I am announcing a net increase of around 370 in troop numbers to bring the total of UK forces in Iraq to about 8,900. As the House knows, we keep the number and composition of UK forces in Multinational Division (South East) under constant review. Since MND (SE) was established in the summer of 2003, we have made a series of adjustments in the light of the security situation on the ground and the advice of the General Officer Commanding. The most significant have included the multinationalisation of the headquarters, which was originally based on a UK division; the deployment of two additional surge battalions which I announced in September; and the deployment of a replacement for those battalions, together with a small number of Royal Military Police, primarily to provide a surge capability to assist with the training and development of Iraqi security forces in MND (SE), which I announced to the House on 28 October and 15 December.

As a result of the latest advice from the General Officer Commanding, we plan a number of further such adjustments in MND (SE). The two surge battalions—currently 1st Battalion the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders and 1st Battalion the Royal Highland Fusiliers—have made excellent progress in their work with local Iraqi forces, which are increasingly taking on responsibility for basic security functions in MND (SE). We therefore judge it unlikely that we shall need two battalions to perform that role beyond this summer, but that too we will keep under review. As a sensible precaution, we are reducing the notice to move of 40 Commando the Royal Marines in order to keep open the option of deploying it to continue this work when the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders and Royal Highland Fusiliers reach the end of their tours. In the meantime, 40 Commando will continue with its current activities.

In January 2004, we deployed two additional platoons of Royal Military Police from 110 Provost Company to assist in the provision of specialised training for the Iraqi police service. They will reach the end of their tour in June, having performed an invaluable role. We judge that the work should continue, and therefore plan to deploy two platoons of the RMP from 160 Provost Company to replace those returning next month.

The House will be aware that the security situation in Iraq remains difficult, even in parts of MND (SE), which overall continues to be one of the more stable areas of Iraq. In particular, there is a continuing threat from violent groups in the area around al-Amarah in the province of Maysan. Although UK forces and Iraqi security forces have taken, and continue to take, robust and appropriate action to deal with this threat, the General Officer Commanding, Major-General Stewart, judges that with the planned withdrawal of 1st Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders—a light infantry battalion—at the end of its six-month tour in July, it would be advisable to take this opportunity to deploy a
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1726
 
Warrior-trained infantry battalion. That will provide Major-General Stewart with a well-protected and mobile reserve, giving him greater operational flexibility. We therefore plan to deploy 1st Battalion the Black Watch with a small number of logistic enablers. That will involve around 600 personnel—a net increase of around 200 when the withdrawal of 1st Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders is taken into account.

Finally, in view of the nature of the threat posed by violent groups around al-Amarah in particular, which has involved both mortar and rocket attacks on UK bases, Major-General Stewart has requested, and I have agreed, the deployment of 69 Squadron from 36 Regiment Royal Engineers—some 170 personnel—for about three months. The engineers will carry out force-protection work, including the construction of additional physical defences in British bases, to reduce the threat posed by the kinds of attacks that we have seen in recent weeks.

I emphasise that these are sensible adjustments, at the request of the General Officer Commanding, to UK forces in MND (SE). It remains the case that we, with our coalition partners, are considering the levels and dispositions of forces required in Iraq in the months ahead, to support in particular the sovereign interim Government of Iraq through the process leading to the election of a transitional assembly and Government early in 2005. If we judge that further changes to the UK military contribution in Iraq would be appropriate to support that process, we will of course inform the House at the earliest opportunity. At present, however, no such decision has been taken.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex) (Con): Conservative Members are glad that the Secretary of State has come here today—rightly, at the insistence of my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the Opposition—to make his long-overdue and heavily trailed statement about further deployments to Multinational Division (South East). Will he confirm that that is fully endorsed by the chiefs of staff, and is he satisfied that it fully conforms to the Government's apparently slight understanding of their own political objectives? If that is indeed the case, we believe that it is right that this should happen in order to provide additional security as a reserve, and stability as the handover approaches and throughout the period leading up to the elections—subject, of course, to the Iraqi interim Government's wishes.

I have to say that the choice of 1st Battalion the Black Watch strikes my hon. Friends and me as astonishing. The Secretary of State may realise that the Black Watch fought throughout Telic 1, and has been back in England for less than a year. It seems an astonishing manifestation of overstretch and of the state of the Army in terms of the regiments that it can deploy that it has to deploy a regiment that has only recently returned from Iraq after a very hard time.

On the wider but vital issue of the unity of command, given the confusion earlier in the week on the part of the Prime Minister, will the Secretary of State confirm that these troops will continue to be under British command after 30 June, within existing coalition arrangements? Will he also tell us what the relationship is likely to be between the interim Iraqi Government and any new multinational force, and will he say what the rules of immunity will mean in practice?
 
27 May 2004 : Column 1727
 

In the light of his announcement, will the Secretary of State say whether troops in Iraq on existing operations will be moved from their present duties to other locations? As for practical questions of the deployment, will he confirm that the Black Watch, the Royal Military Police and the sappers will be given all the equipment they will need for operations in intense heat and a hostile environment? Will he also confirm that they will have received the full training package in every respect, including conduct on the taking and processing of prisoners? How many of the troops will be reservists? Will the Secretary of State assure us that, given the likely nature of the security challenges that the Black Watch in particular will face, the troops further deployed will have full access to all the riot control equipment that they may need? Has he assured himself on their medical back-up, and will he confirm that they are fully briefed on the welfare package?

Will the Secretary of State assure the House that there is no intention of deploying British troops out of their existing zones of operations? Will he confirm that other discussions about further and indeed possibly strategic deployments are continuing, and will he reassure us that he will make no statement on these matters while the House is in recess? There are still many questions of profound importance with which he will need to deal over the coming weeks. We shall want his assurance that the House will be kept better informed than has previously been the case.

The Government need to show that they have reclaimed a grip on the drift of their policy in Iraq, and prove that they are the master of their objectives and not merely the victim of events.


Next Section IndexHome Page