---

Iraq

3. Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Con): How many personnel are serving in Iraq. [193206]

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon): Currently, about 8,100 United Kingdom armed forces personnel are deployed in Iraq.

Bob Spink: The Prime Minister said last week that the Black Watch would be back by Christmas, but today we hear that it has no exit date. May we have clarification on that? Are there additional plans for the further redeployment of British troops outside the Multi-National Division (South-East) before the January elections in Iraq?
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1129
 

Mr. Hoon: My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said that the Black Watch would be home by Christmas, and I repeated that in my statement last Thursday. He went on to say that, for operational reasons, it would not be sensible to discuss a precise date, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman understands that. I repeat the point that I made last Thursday: there are no plans to increase the numbers of British forces deployed outside MND (S-E).

Mr. Stephen McCabe (Birmingham, Hall Green) (Lab): How many of our personnel in Iraq does my right hon. Friend estimate are buoyed up by the constant attacks on British policy? Can a modern army win a war, particularly a terrorist war, if its mission is constantly undermined by attacks from its own Parliament and in its own press? Is not that the real question that some people on the home front should be asking themselves?

Mr. Hoon: A balance must be struck between the needs of free speech in a democracy—we need to communicate information, particularly in the House—and the operational requirements to which I have just referred. It is a balance that is sometimes extremely difficult to strike. Understandably, right hon. and hon. Members want as much information as they can get, but it is my responsibility to ensure that I do not make information available that would in any way compromise the operational effectiveness of our armed forces.

Mr. Paul Keetch (Hereford) (LD): In his interview on the "Today" programme the Chief of the Defence Staff seemed to intimate that if operations in Falluja were not concluded by Christmas the Black Watch might be replaced by British troops in that area. If so, is that covered by the agreement approved by the Cabinet last week, or would that require a fresh request from the United States?

Mr. Hoon: I listened to that extremely good interview very carefully. I do not believe that the hon. Gentleman is right in suggesting that any such intimation was given. In response to a hypothetical question, the Chief of the Defence Staff understandably was not prepared absolutely to guarantee that those forces would not be replaced in position, but I thought that he came as near as anyone could in the circumstances to saying that that was not very likely.

Geraint Davies (Croydon, Central) (Lab): The cold-blooded murder of 49 Iraqi armed trainees yesterday by al-Qaeda underlines the fact that this is a fight between murderous terrorists and those Iraqis who want peace and democracy. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that sufficient forces are in place in the run-up to January for democracy to prevail, as he did in Afghanistan? Will he ask the media to reflect on the fact that their constant carping up to January will undermine investment and undermine democracy, and play into the hands of the terrorists?

Mr. Hoon: I condemn absolutely those appalling attacks. There is a struggle going on in Iraq between those who are trying to rebuild the country, such as the brave men who died in yesterday's appalling attack, and
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1130
 
those who appear to have no ambition other than to reduce Iraq to a state of terrifying anarchy. It is important that we continue to support those who are trying to rebuild and reconstruct their country.

Derek Conway (Old Bexley and Sidcup) : The Secretary of State will understand why many people believe that the Black Watch deployment is really for political rather than operational purposes. Will he tell those who gave him the benefit of the doubt whether the operational purposes result from the fact that he underestimated the effectiveness of the enemy or overestimated the effectiveness of the friendly forces?

Mr. Hoon: The operational reason is that both Iraqi forces and coalition forces are undertaking extra tasks, which have been designed to deal with the threat from the kind of terrorists who appear to have been behind the recent appalling attack. It is right that other members of the coalition should assist the Iraqis and the United States in carrying out those extra responsibilities, so the decision was taken for entirely operational reasons.

Mr. John Grogan (Selby) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend agree with Senator John Kerry, who says that the way forward in Iraq is to convene a summit of the world's major powers, key nations in the regions and key Arab and Muslim nations?

Mr. Hoon: The allies engaged in Iraq have regular discussions. About a week ago, I addressed such a meeting, where representatives of coalition countries were brought together to discuss the latest developments, and I am sure that that process will continue.

Sir Peter Tapsell (Louth and Horncastle) (Con): In the memorial week of the charge of the Light Brigade, is it not clear that by invading Iraq the Secretary of State has shown himself to be as stupid as Lord Lucan?

Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should know better, and he should know that temperate language is called for.

Sir Peter Tapsell: I withdraw "stupid" and insert—

Mr. Speaker: Order—just withdrawing the word is fine.

Mr. Hoon: I know that the Conservative party revels in glorious failure, and long may it continue.

Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire) (Lab): Would it not make more sense to have American troops in Iraq under British control rather than British troops under American control? Have we not made a better fist of things than the Americans, whose activities have been disastrous?

Mr. Hoon: From time to time in Iraq, British troops have been under American control and American troops have been under British control. That is in the nature of coalition operations.
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1131
 

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex) (Con): May I press the Secretary of State? What are his plans if the task currently being undertaken by the Black Watch runs beyond Christmas? Would he deploy the ingoing divisional reserve to the north and, if so, what plans would he be likely to have to reinforce British troops in the south of Iraq?

Mr. Hoon: We have always made it clear—I have said this on a number of occasions in the House—that we keep the number of troops in Iraq under constant review. The number of troops depends entirely on the security situation on the ground and on the events that the troops must deal with. As I said on Thursday, and I repeat again today, we have no plans at the present time to increase the forces in Iraq beyond the increases that have been announced to the House previously.

Mr. Soames: At the very time when the exceptional qualities of British troops are needed as never before, the Government appear hellbent on reducing the numbers of fighting men in the British Army. Does that not reveal the utter folly of the Government's plans to disband four infantry battalions? Does it not further explain the profound anxiety expressed by Members on both sides of the House at such an untimely and foolish proposal?

Mr. Hoon: I understand why the hon. Gentleman keeps making that political point, but he knows full well that when he was Minister for the Armed Forces in the last Conservative Government the infantry were significantly readjusted in order to invest more in those who support the infantry. The reality is that unless logisticians, engineers and intelligence personnel are in position, it is not possible to use the infantry battalions to which he belatedly claims to be so attached. Our proposal will increase the number of deployable, usable infantry battalions over and above the present position, and he should welcome it, not criticise it.

Front-line Armed Forces

4. Mr. David Kidney (Stafford) (Lab): What work he is undertaking to strengthen the support services and logistics for front-line armed forces. [193207]

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Mr. Adam Ingram): We have launched a comprehensive transformation programme for defence logistics that covers everything from supply chain effectiveness to a new relationship with industry on supporting military equipment. The programme is already bringing about improvements identified as necessary from operations in Iraq and elsewhere. It will also deliver substantial efficiency savings that can be reinvested in the front line.

Mr. Kidney: As my right hon. Friend makes ongoing changes, will he bear in mind the vital contribution to all successful campaigns that is made by logistics and timely distribution? May I thank him for his visit to RAF Stafford last month, where he saw the services that it offers? Does he recall that day and the offer made by the Defence Storage and Distribution Agency to take over the engineering wing from Strike Command? Is he
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1132
 
yet in a position to respond to that request, because it would be a great boost to morale locally were he to agree to it?

Mr. Ingram: Yes, I well remember that visit. On all such visits, one learns a lot about what happens on the ground and encounters the quality of the people first hand. I was impressed by the work that is being done in all aspects of RAF Stafford's activities in supporting the front line. I have had a good, hard look at the Defence Storage and Distribution Agency's request to take over the engineering wing that is based at Stafford and is under Strike Command. Having done so, I am minded that the engineering wing should be transferred to DSDA as part of the Defence Logistics Organisation. However, that would not exempt the engineering wing from scrutiny under the DLO business process review and the future defence supply chain initiatives. Of course, we would consult on the proposal in the usual way. I am coming to the conclusion that my hon. Friend seeks and hope to be able to give him a thorough explanation very soon.

Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con): I am sure that the Minister will join me in paying tribute to the magnificent contribution made in my constituency to operations in Iraq by 23rd Air Defence Regiment in Colerne, by 9th Regiment the Royal Logistics Corps in Hullavington, and by the Hercules aircraft at RAF Lyneham. However, would he care to comment on why he is now apparently considering the closure of Colerne and Hullavington, and why he recently announced the closure of RAF Lyneham, having apparently entered into discussions—as I hear from Mrs. Bucknell, a councillor in my constituency—with none other than Virgin Airways about refuelling in Lyneham after he sells it off?

Mr. Ingram: Of course I share the warm feelings towards all those who have provided support to our front line, whether in Iraq or anywhere else. They do a magnificent job. However, the underlying logic of the hon. Gentleman's comments is that nothing should change, but things do change in successive decades. Previous Conservative Administrations have taken through fundamental transformations of the armed forces. We are considering one specific area—the DLO, which plays a very big part in the overall delivery of what we do. It is right to do so. Out of that will come conclusions that may not suit the hon. Gentleman but will be for the overall benefit of the armed forces.

Mr. John Smith (Vale of Glamorgan) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend look again at his preferred option, announced on 16 September, to renationalise the air depth support of almost the entire front line fleet of RAF fast jets, on the grounds that it runs counter to the recommendations of his own strategic defence review and makes no military or economic sense whatsoever?

Mr. Ingram: I have paid tribute to my hon. Friend before for his sterling hard work on behalf of the Defence Aviation Repair Agency at St. Athan, but he has got it wrong on this occasion. The situation is not as he describes it. The roll forward to Marham of the Tornado certainly has an adverse impact on DARA
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1133
 
St. Athan, but the roll back of the rotary wing to Fleetlands retains it within the DARA civilian structure, albeit with a significant component of military personnel working alongside it. I hope that my hon. Friend understands that even had there been a roll back of the work to DARA St. Athan many—indeed, probably as many—of the civilian posts would have gone because of the need to retain that engineering and technical capability within the RAF.

Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): The whole House understands the importance of support services and logistics to our armed forces, particularly in Iraq. Last month, the Public Accounts Committee published its report on the Ministry of Defence and Operation Telic. Paragraph 10 of its conclusions and recommendations states:

"The repeated identification of important logistics lessons such as the absence of an adequate consignment tracking system suggests fundamental shortcomings in the Department's ability to learn and act upon lessons from previous experiences."

Given that we are commemorating the 150th anniversary of the Crimean war, as the House already knows, what hope is there that the Ministry of Defence will learn any lessons about logistics?

Mr. Ingram: I really do not think that the hon. Gentleman fully understands the subject. If he were to examine the Defence Logistics Organisation transformation programme—I offer him the opportunity to come along to be briefed on all that we want to do—he would be aware that we have tried to put together a complex organisation, which perhaps should have happened before under the original DLO. There were stresses and strains surrounding aspects of equipment delivery, but many of the problems identified have been addressed. That applies wholly to the tracking system, which is absolutely crucial for the delivery of items to the front line. If the hon. Gentleman thinks that such hiccups did not occur in the past, he does not live in the real world.

---