Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
13. Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde) (Con): If he will make a statement on when he expects to conclude his negotiations with BAE Systems on the tranche 2 contract for the Eurofighter. [179371]
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): Negotiations with BAE Systems regarding the order for tranche 2 Typhoons are continuing. We and our partner nations need to acquire aircraft with the right capabilities to meet our requirements, at an affordable price.
Mr. Jack: While I thank the Secretary of State for those words, may I point out to him that they do not answer the question I posed? He has been in discussion with BAE Systems on tranche 2 for at least the last nine months, and he will be aware of the uncertainties that the absence of an announcement is causing among the work force at BAE at Warton in my constituency. Will he outline the problems that are preventing a decision from being made on that vital procurement programme? When will he be able to announce that decisionat Farnborough or when the comprehensive spending review is complete?
Mr. Hoon: I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman's idea of a negotiation appears to be to find out what the other side want and give it to them. He was a Treasury Minister in the last Conservative Government, so perhaps that explains why their economic policies were such a disaster. However, I can tell him that there is a question about the price. We are engaged in a negotiation and I will go on negotiating on the Government's behalf until I get the right price.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): Is my right hon. Friend aware that a lot of workers throughout Lancashire are very worried about tranche 2? What message does he have for the work force there and what message does he have for the management of BAE Systems?
Mr. Hoon:
I shall not repeat what I have just said on the question of the price, but on behalf of the Government I say to the work force, and indeed to the management, that the six aircraft that have been received in service are performing superbly. This is a
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1074
magnificent aircraft and it is exceeding our expectations. The next production aircraft is due to be accepted in service this week, and two aircraft are shortly due to lead the export campaign in Singapore, where the aircraft has already been shortlisted. This is a superb aircraft, but obviously it is important that we get the right price for it.
Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): Will the Secretary of State explain the implications for RAF Leeming should he decide not to proceed with the second tranche?
Mr. Hoon: The second tranche aircraft, as the hon. Lady knows, is of a different kind from tranche 1. It will have different capabilities and will provide an air-to-ground capability not originally envisaged when Typhoon was designed many, many years ago. It is vital to the future not only of RAF Leeming, but of the strike capabilities of the RAF that we secure tranche 2 aircraft. I emphasise, however, that that must be at an affordable price.
14. Mrs. Joan Humble (Blackpool, North and Fleetwood) (Lab): What progress has been made on reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. [179372]
The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Mr. Adam Ingram): Through our contribution to the international security assistance force in Kabul, and to the joint departmental provincial reconstruction teams in north-west Afghanistan, our armed forces help to facilitate the reconstruction programmes of the Afghan Transitional Authority and international development agencies. An essential part of that is supporting the development of Afghanistan's own security forces. We are helping to train the Afghan national army and, through the provincial reconstruction teams, have provided assistance to the Afghan national police.
Mrs. Humble: I thank the Minister for that reply. When British forces help in the reconstruction of Afghanistan by training police, will they also consider training civilians, ensuring that both men and women are involved in the process, so that we reconstruct not just buildings but civil society in Afghanistan?
Mr. Ingram:
Absolutely. That is one of the main thrusts of the provincial reconstruction team, which is a multi-departmental initiative, with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development. In Mazar-e-Sharif, the DFID representative has in the region of £1 million to allocate to a range of projects, some of them linked directly to security sector reform, but also to the whole reconstruction effort of rebuilding roads and bridges, reopening schools, reopening courthouses, or opening courthouses where perhaps none have been, and creating that normal society. My hon. Friend raises an important point. That is what our mission is in Afghanistan, and we are beginning to make progress.
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1075
Mr. Andrew Mackay (Bracknell) (Con): Would the Minister accept that the people of Afghanistan have been badly let down by NATO in its first out-of-area operation? The troops have failed to arrive, time is running out and the elections are due in September. What will happen at the NATO meeting in Istanbul next month to ensure that troops really are there, that it is not all words, and that there is some action from NATO members?
Mr. Ingram: I would not agree with the view expressed by the right hon. Gentleman that we have let down the people of Afghanistan. I have recounted in response to two separate and subsequent questions the range of activities in which we are engaged, and I have also said that we must live in the real world. Trying to put forward a major new initiative requires a lot of hard discussions and negotiations, and all the various coalition nations must decide what their best input into that is. We have made very good progress, and much more progress will be made. The situation is not ideal in Afghanistan; more remains to be done, and that is what will be addressed in Istanbul next week.
15. Mr. Ian Liddell-Grainger (Bridgwater) (Con): If he will make a statement on the role of the Fusiliers in Iraq. [179373]
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): Our armed forces have done and continue to do an outstanding job in southern Iraq. The role of the 1st Battalion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers last year, and the 1st Battalion the Royal Highland Fusiliers and the 1st Battalion the Royal Welch Fusiliers this year, has been to work for the creation of a safe, secure and stable environment for the Iraqi people.
Mr. Liddell-Grainger: Given that four fusiliers are at the moment being charged with various offences, and that other fusiliers were under investigation in relation to certain things that happened last year, will the Secretary of State please tell the House what will be the situation in relation to the other fusiliers under investigation? Will they be able to continue their military career with no blemish on their good character?
Mr. Hoon:
As I have made clear to the House on previous occasions, it is important that those negotiations are able to proceed free of any kind of ministerial or political interference. I give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. It is therefore a matter for the appropriate prosecution authorities to determine whether any charges arise out of these investigations. I assure him, as I do the House, that the Ministry of Defence is well aware of the remarkable service by the Fusiliers and by all members of Britain's armed forces. I would not want anyone to go away with the idea that simply because certain individuals might be subject to prosecution, that in any way affects the high regard in which the Fusiliers and members of Britain's armed forces are held in respect of their excellent work in Iraq.
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1076
Mr. Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con): The allegations against the Fusiliers and other battalions involved in Iraq in 2003 do not appear in any way to be replicated with regard to the divisional detention facility that the Secretary of State allowed the Defence Committee to visit. We were left with the impression of a facility being run in absolute convergence with the fourth Geneva convention, as every Member of the House would expect. What will happen after 1 July to those detainees, as far as the United Kingdom is concerned? Does he think that the Americans have the proper legal authority to continue with their operations in Abu Ghraib, as they appeared to be suggesting this morning?
Mr. Hoon: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman and other members of the Defence Committee for taking the trouble to visit the facility just outside Basra. I was there last Monday and saw the high standards that are maintained by British military personnel, something that has been reflected upon by the International Committee of the Red Cross.
As for the position on 1 July, negotiations with the interim Government are still to be concluded but I am confident that, whatever decision is reached, it will be in accordance with international law. Indeed, the new Security Council resolution contains provision for multinational forces to retain physical control of prisoners, subject to the overriding sovereignty of the Iraqi Government. That seems to be a sensible short-term solution, but I recognise that, ultimately, it is important that the Iraqi Government have both legal and physical control of detainees.
17. Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere) (Con): How many reservists are deployed in Iraq. [179375]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Ivor Caplin): All our reserve forces have performed extremely well when asked to do so in Iraq and elsewhere in the world. I place on record again the House's utmost appreciation for all their efforts and for the continuing support of their employers. As at 16 June, 1,483 reservists were serving in Iraq.
Mr. Clappison: The Minister is absolutely right to pay tribute to reservists in the terms in which he has just done so[Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. Members will have to keep the conversations down. It is unfair to the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Clappison: Is the Minister satisfied that individual members of the reserve who are part of the tranche of reservists due to go to Iraq in October will receive at least 21 days' notice that they are part of that mobilisation, and can they expect to serve six months, but no more?
Mr. Caplin:
The hon. Gentleman will be aware from the lessons-learned process following Operation Telic 1 that we made it clear that the 21-day notice period would be appropriate for reservists and their employers. I anticipate that all those going to Iraq in due course will receive 21 days' notice, and I expect their tour of duty to be six months.
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1077
Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge) (LD): At the early stages, the reservists felt they were very hard done by, as they were expected to stay out there when the forces that they went out with returned to the UK. There are fears in the armed forces that that will lead to greater difficulties in recruiting reservists. What work is the Minister doing to research what the feelings of those reservists are and to ensure that, when they return, they are properly debriefed?
Mr. Caplin: We have a successful mobilisation and demobilisation process at Chilwell. I have seen it and the hon. Gentleman would be a welcome visitor to Chilwell. The latest survey of Territorial Army soldiers shows that 70 per cent. regarded their morale as high or very high. As I made clear on 13 May in the personnel debate, we plan to consult on the review of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 and statutory instrument No. 309 before the summer recess.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |