---

Falklands War

5. Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): What steps his Department is taking to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Falklands conflict; and if he will make a statement. [193208]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Ivor Caplin): Preliminary discussions about commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Falklands conflict have taken place with the South Atlantic Medal Association, known as SAMA 82. When those ideas have been developed further and agreed with the veterans, I will make an appropriate announcement to the House.

Mr. Hoyle: I welcome my hon. Friend's answer. Will he ensure that there will be a tri-service approach to ensure that everyone will have the opportunity to go back to the Falklands? It will be the 25th anniversary of the conflict, so we must ensure that the families of those who died will be able to visit the Falklands. We must act
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1134
 
sufficiently early because of the logistics of putting such a project together, and I look forward to my hon. Friend taking those people out there.

Mr. Caplin: I have written to the chairman of the South Atlantic Medal Association to ask about those issues. I hope that my hon. Friend and the House are aware of the significant amount of work that the Ministry of Defence is undertaking on events in 2005. We will stage commemorations for VE and VJ day, veterans' awareness week and a national day of celebration to commemorate the end of world war two on Sunday 10 July. Plans have recently been confirmed for the commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the battle of Trafalgar.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con): Will the hon. Gentleman contrast the support that was given for the deployment of British troops to recover the Falkland Islands with the lack of support felt in this country for the deployment in Iraq? Surely the difference is this—

Mr. Speaker: Order. We are talking about an anniversary. The right hon. and learned Gentleman's question is far too wide of that.

Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood) (Con): Will the Government take the opportunity of the commemoration of the campaign to recapture the Falkland Islands from a brutal dictatorship to reflect on the crucial role played by the Fleet Air Arm in achieving that objective? Surely the best thing that we could do to honour those who laid down their lives would be to ensure that naval aviation does not become a second-class aspect of our future defence.

Mr. Caplin: The hon. Gentleman knows that there will be a joint strike force in the future. I certainly pay tribute to those who fought in 1982 to recover the Falkland Islands.

Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley) (Con): I know that we live in an era of barmy political correctness and that there might be a temptation to play down the significance of the 25th anniversary to avoid stepping on the toes, or offending the sensitivities, of another country, but will the Minister assure me that that will not happen and that we will assist veterans who wish to visit the islands during the celebrations? Will Ministers play an active role in the celebrations?

Mr. Caplin: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State visited the Falkland Islands on the 20th anniversary. I assure the House that the 25th anniversary will be taken seriously—the Government will certainly uphold that commitment, which was made to the veterans of the South Atlantic Medal Association.

Army Establishment

6. Patrick Mercer (Newark) (Con): If he will make a statement on manning levels in the Army. [193209]
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1135
 

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Mr. Adam Ingram): As at 1 September 2004, whole Army trained strength stood at 104,090, including 3,400 Gurkhas and 830 full-time reserve service personnel. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence made clear in July when he announced plans to modernise the force structure, organisation and capabilities of the armed forces to meet the challenges of the 21st century, we envisage a future Army of around 102,000. That is, however, dependent on achieving full normalisation in Northern Ireland. In the meantime, therefore, the strength of the Army will remain broadly as it is today.

Patrick Mercer: I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. Tomorrow, the 22nd Cheshire Regiment hands over in Basra after an outstanding, difficult and well-fought tour. I am sure that the Minister will be aware that it started that tour 90 men under strength. Is he aware of what sort of problem that gives the commanding officer and company commanders, and how frightening and dangerous that is for soldiers on the ground? Can he confirm absolutely that the recruiting strategy is right and, more to the point, that scrapping of infantry regiments is the correct step?

Mr. Ingram: The hon. Gentleman raises a number of points. We recognise the issues in relation to under-strength regiments, which is why the transformation and rebrigading of the Army is essential, to try to ensure that they have adequate strength as they move into a warfighting or peacekeeping mode, and that they have all the logisticians—engineers, signallers and all the key enablers—which they do not have at present, or for which they require augmentation from elsewhere. That is part of the underlying approach of this transformation, which is about making available more capable battalions for deployment. I ask the hon. Gentleman to recognise that. I pay tribute to the work done by the Cheshires and all the regiments that have been based in Iraq over the past year and some months. To their credit, they have carried on delivering the objectives of the coalition—to bring about stability in Iraq and to give Iraq back to the Iraqis.

Chris McCafferty (Calder Valley) (Lab): When will my right hon. Friend be in a position to answer my written question of last Wednesday on the comparative strengths of the Duke of Wellington's Regiment, 3 Para and the Prince of Wales's Royal Regiment? Is he aware that the Duke of Wellington's Regiment is eight over strength, comparing extremely favourably with the Royals, which is 122 under strength, and 3 Para, which is 58 under strength? Does he recognise the premier position—

Mr. Speaker: Order. Hon. Members have only one supplementary question. The hon. Lady can leave it at that, and the Minister can reply.

Mr. Ingram: I shall try to reply. I do not know when I will be able to answer the question that my hon. Friend asks. The information may be in the process of being delivered to me for answer now. I hope that her points will be dealt with in that answer, and that that will assist her in further argumentation on behalf of her local regiment.
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1136
 

Annabelle Ewing (Perth) (SNP): The Prime Minister said last week that the Black Watch and the redeployment to northern Iraq were crucial to the US army effort. My constituents in Perth, where the Black Watch has its regimental headquarters, want to know why the Black Watch is crucial to the US army but not as important to this Government, who are planning, when it returns home, to amalgamate it out of existence?

Mr. Ingram: The hon. Lady has it wholly wrong. If she had heard the earlier answer about why the transformation and rebrigading of resources is under way, she would know that I speak to many serving soldiers—young soldiers and young officers—who are looking very much to the future. I heard one of her colleagues saying on television yesterday that the role of the Scottish regiments under an independent Scotland would be to serve peacekeeping purposes. Whom does she think would create the peace? Someone must create that environment. That is what our troops do—they are trained to war-fight and to peace-keep. Under an independent Scotland, they would be in the second league.

Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle) (Lab): How many regiments would be seriously undermanned were it not for the contribution of the Fijians?

Mr. Ingram: A number. I pay tribute to the Commonwealth servicemen and women who serve alongside our personnel. They make a sizeable and valuable contribution, they are the equal of our citizens, and they are trained to the same high standards.

Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): The Government are planning to restructure the Army into regional regiments—one assumes that that is also to help manning, and that there will be two or three battalions per regional regiment. When a regional regiment is already established, with a proven record of recruitment for two battalions, will the Government consider providing a third battalion?

Mr. Ingram: Half of the Army are already in the structure that has been considered and will soon be proposed to the Army Board and then to Ministers. All the lessons that have been learned about the larger regiments have, I think, been of great benefit. A range of factors accrue from that, some of which I touched on earlier, but I note the hon. Gentleman's interest. I suppose he is talking about a particular regiment, which he did not mention, so I do not think that I should either.

---