division_name: Defence White Paper
motion: <p>[Relevant documents: First Report, Session 1999-2000, on the OCCAR Convention, HC 69, and the Government's response thereto, HC 224; Second Report, Session 1999-2000, on the Ministry of Defence Annual Reporting Cycle, HC 158; Sixth Report, Session 1998-99, on the Reserves Call-out Order 1999 and Progress of Territorial Army Restructuring, HC 860, and the Government's response thereto, HC 220 of Session 1999-2000; Seventh Report, Session 1998-99, on the Strategic Defence Review: Defence Medical Services, HC 447, and the Government's response thereto, HC 221 of Session 1999-2000; Eighth Report, Session 1998-99, on the Committee's Major Procurement Projects Survey: The Common New Generation Frigate Programme, HC 544, and the Government's response thereto, HC 222 of Session 1999-2000; and   Ninth Report, Session 1998-99, on Defence Research, HC 616, and the Government's response thereto, HC 223 of Session 1999-2000.] 
  <p>Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [22 February],  That this House approves the 1999 Defence White Paper (Cm 4446).--[ Mr. Hoon. ]
  <p>Except when exercising, or where for other reasons a high speed is obligatory . . . the most economical speed . . . is to be employed when making passage from port to port or between harbour and exercise area.
  <p>The challenges of the future will make it even more critical that we are able to recruit and retain the brightest and best for the Armed Forces and the Ministry of Defence.
  <p>a better, more streamlined, and more joined up way of providing support to the front line
  <p>The Strategic Defence Review . . . By modernising and reshaping our Armed Forces to meet the challenges of the 21st century . . . will give our Services the firm foundation that they need to plan for the long term.
  <p>For those 10 projects common to the 1993 and 1998 Reports, estimated slippage has risen from an average of 36 months to 57 months.
  <p>Since 1993, four factors have dominated delays: technical difficulties, budgetary constraints, project definition and the collaborative process . . . Comparison between years shows that all factors now give rise to more delay than they did in 1993, but that the "technical difficulties" factor has grown by only around 10 per cent., while the other categories show delay increasing by up to 100 per cent.
  <p>In other manufacturing industries, "time to market" has generally shortened as new technology has facilitated design and development processes. Figure 17 shows no such trend is evident in defence procurement.
  <p>a capable and highly accurate weapon--[ Official Report , 22 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1393.]
   
  
  <p>This delay could have had disastrous consequences and we look to the Ministry to ensure that it does not happen again.
  <p>To be honest, it is useless, it falls apart on you.
  <p>There are terrible malfunctions. Everyone knows it is a weapon that you couldn't rely on in a real war.
  <p>The British squaddies were frustrated because yesterday morning they were given an order not to discuss the SA80 with the press after revelations in  The Times  yesterday.
  <p>the criticisms were carefully investigated. It was concluded that stoppages were largely attributable to incorrect maintenance . . . Some units had not been employing the correct lubrication and cleaning procedures.
  <p>the United States Administration have made it clear that one of the specific considerations that they will take into account--
  <p>is the reaction and attitude of the allies.--[ Official Report , 21 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1224.]
  <p>When we are satisfied with progress towards our goal of the global elimination of nuclear weapons, we will ensure that British nuclear weapons are included in negotiations.--[ Official Report , 24 January 2000; Vol. 343, c. 36W.]
  <p>I am sorry to have left the Committee.--[ Official Report , 22 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1444.]
  <p>In terms of broad policy, there is little new in the . . . White Paper
  <p>It appears self-evident to us that matching resources to tasks is becoming increasingly fraught, stretching both crews and vessels to unwise levels even during peacetime . . . It is our view that this shortcoming poses a serious, and potentially fatal, threat to the long-term security of this country.
  <p>our case that chronic overstretch will be the normal state of affairs within the Army unless the Government's restructuring proposals are modified does not rest on the assumption that the additional deployments in Northern Ireland and Bosnia will themselves necessarily be extended.
  <p>Our concern that there might be difficulties in managing the Defence Budget into the 1990s has as a result of our inquiry turned into the strongest suspicion that there will indeed be considerable difficulties leading to cancellations, slowing-down of acquisitions and the running-on of equipment beyond its economic life-span. The evidence we have received from the Ministry has not allayed our fears.
  <p>We cannot recommend the 1996 Statement on the Defence Estimates to the House unless Ministers make clear in the debate that this year's Statement will not again be undermined by further defence cuts in the 1996 Budget or by any other means.
  <p>The case for the restoration of some of the cuts made as a result of Options for Change and Front Line First is well made, but we are now promised instead a period of stability at the present level of funding. We insist that the defence spending plans set out in the 1996 budget must at least be maintained in real terms in future years. Any further reduction would jeopardise the defence of the realm.
  <p>As the Kosovo conflict showed, and as the figures for defence spending confirm, European defence capabilities are lagging dangerously far behind those of the United States.
  <p>
  That is eminently sensible and perfectly accurate. She added:
  <p> 
   
  This is particularly true in the vital area of military technology.
  <p>The impulse towards developing a new European defence and separate European armed forces has little to do with the fact that Europe is cutting its defences while America is increasing hers.
  <p> 
   
  It has even less to do with any serious European response to the global dangers of proliferation, which can only be properly met by ballistic missile defence.
  <p>No. The real drive towards a separate European defence is the same as that towards a single European currency--namely the utopian venture of creating a single European superstate to rival America on the world stage . . . This has been a long-standing French aspiration.
  <p>in the post-Cold War strategic environment we are increasingly likely to face new and often unexpected operational challenges.
  <p>no significant ballistic missile threat to the UK and its interests will exist for some years.
  <p>the US are consulting closely with us on their plans to improve their defences against a projected limited inter-continental ballistic missile threat from proliferators.
  <p>the USA are consulting closely with us--
  <p>We cannot . . . deploy the JRRF quickly enough to meet the likely requirements of the new strategic environment.
  <p>lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in their death they were not divided.
   
  
  <p>
   I beg to move, To leave out from "House" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:
  <p> 
   
    declines to approve a defence policy which has been used to make war upon innocent civilians in Iraq and Yugoslavia under NATO command, contrary to the provisions of the United Nations Charter, without any explicit authorisation by the House of Commons elected to exercise democratic control over the Government of the day, which involves the use of cluster bombs, and which is based upon the possession of, and threat to use, nuclear weapons, which have been declared illegal by both the International Court of Justice and a Scottish court.
  <p>violence against Serbs and other minorities (including moderate Albanians) was still increasing and pointed to a failure by the UN Mission to protect human rights. Amnesty is concerned that the UN Mission and KFOR appear reluctant to take steps to bring the KLA to justice.
  <p>Kosovo Serbs, Roma, Muslim Slavs and others have been targeted by elements of the Kosovo Albanian population for expulsion, harassment, intimidation, house-burning, abductions and death. It highlights two horrific trends; the targeting of vulnerable elderly Kosovo Serbs and the increasing participation of juveniles in human rights violations, underlining the growing intolerance that has emerged within the Kosovo Albanian community.
  <p>it seems clear that the extent of KLA involvement is of such a nature and scope that the question of explicit or tacit involvement by the leadership require close examination by the International Community.
  <p>My mother who is 80 years old suffered a heart attack because it reminded her of 1943 when Hitler's SS units broke into her apartment in the same way.
  <p>The new trouble spot is the south-western corner of Serbia which is largely populated by Albanians. Former members of the KLA have started to operate in the border villages, carrying guns, wearing paramilitary uniforms and attacking Serb police in an apparent bid to provoke a Serb reaction and NATO help.
  <p>Despite assurances, the truth is that despite the high-flown rhetoric about a multi-national Kosovo, NATO has disgracefully failed the Serbs--this has been a dreadful betrayal as well as a denial of the Serbs' human rights.
  <p>American sources within NATO are up to their old trick of demonising Serbs--accusing those in Mitrovica of receiving guns from Belgrade as though they might be expected to defend themselves with pea-shooters--
   
  
  <p>I remind the House that the defence of the realm is the paramount responsibility of any Government. Defence policy cannot be determined by Treasury diktat . . . Will he--
  <p>stand up to the Treasury and demonstrate Britain's lead in Europe by reversing the damaging cuts in the defence budget? We owe that to our armed forces, which remain the best in the world.--[ Official Report , 22 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1448.]
  <p>the principles and conclusions of the Review--
  <p>are proving as robust and well-founded as we expected them to be . . . the success of our forces in Kosovo
  <p>there is today no direct military threat to the United Kingdom or Western Europe. Nor do we foresee the re-emergence of such a threat.
  <p>America will become increasingly vulnerable to hostile attack on our homeland, and our military superiority will not entirely protect us. . . States, terrorists, and other disaffected groups will acquire weapons of mass destruction and mass disruption, and some will use them. Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers.
  <p>Any attack or aggression against an EU member would be an attack or aggression against the whole EU.
  <p>to address the problems of "asymmetric" threats: terrorism, possibly using crude chemical and biological weapons . . . the other weapons which the weak may choose to deploy against the strong.
  <p>SDR has not sufficiently addressed the problems of dealing with asymmetric threats
  <p>the interdependence between nations and companies
  <p>the Government cannot and will not contemplate anything that suggests any equivalence between the security forces and terrorists . . . there is no way in which such equivalence would be acceptable.--[ Official Report , 22 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1397.]
  <p>It is to NATO that we owe the peace that has been maintained for over 40 years.
  <p>We should develop the WEU, not as an alternative to NATO, but as a means of strengthening Europe's contribution to the common defence of the west.
  <p>Britain's Armed Forces are among the best in the world.
  <p>expectations have been raised and if we do not deliver on people issues we will never again enjoy the credibility of the average Serviceman and woman. This is my number one priority, as without our people we are nothing.
  <p>There is an argument that a strong, more assertive Europe will undermine NATO. I think that is wrong. A Europe that remains allied to the US simply because of its own weaknesses is of limited value. Europe's weakness to provide for its own security interests is more damaging to the transatlantic relationship than an strong Europe with the greater influence in decision making that would go with a greater military contribution to the Alliance.
  <p>We have soldiers living in Serb apartments where they are isolated. We have permanent guards in all Orthodox churches and monasteries without which they would be burnt and bombed. We even escort little old ladies to the bread shop to buy their bread, but on the way a Kosovar Albanian teenager will give the sign of throat-slitting to her face. In terms of what outside intervention in the sense of soldiers, and policemen and civil administrators can achieve, what this tells me is that there is a limit: we're talking about people's attitudes, people's perceptions.
  <p>There appears to be considerable ignorance at the level of the top decision makers of the strength of feeling that any further cuts in the Defence Housing Executive future funding would create among service personnel and their families. Every possible effort must be made to minimise the irreparable damage that this ignorance is doing to the morale of service personnel and their families wishing to live accompanied.
  <p>The additional cost of the mobilisation of the engineering and logistics squadron would be of the order of &#163;3.5 million, for which no provision exists at present. This is, however, one of the elements in the package of proposals aimed at alleviating the effect of overstretch on the armed forces currently being discussed with the Treasury. Any decision to mobilise would have to be dependent on agreement by the Treasury to meet the additional costs involved.
  <p>anticipate that full complement in the Army would be achieved by 2005.--[Official Report, 22 February 2000; Vol. 344, c. 1397.]
  <p>The cumulative evidence of cancelled exercises, delayed equipment programmes and of resources apparently insufficient to reverse the problems of overstretch and undermanning suggest that if the wheels have not yet come of the SDR they are certainly beginning to wobble alarmingly. The Department's finances should be rebalanced in the current Spending Review. Commitments and resources have to be brought back into line or we risk finding ourselves stumbling from one crisis to the next.
  <p>Question put,  That the amendment be made:--
  <p>The House divided:  Ayes 12, Noes 340.
  