Private Military and Security Companies

Tuesday 30th October 2012 Lords Chamber

Question

14:35

Asked By

[The Lord Bishop of Wakefield]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the effect of their use of private military and security companies upon the United Kingdom’s reputation, and its diplomatic and military relationships with those countries in which such companies operate.

[The Senior Minister of State, Department for Communities and Local Government & Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Warsi)]

My Lords, the Government use private security companies to support UK missions in countries emerging from conflict, principally in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Yemen. They are not military companies and operate with the permission and co-operation of host Governments. We work with host Governments to address any concerns raised. We are working with the industry to raise standards globally by establishing a voluntary, independently audited and internationally recognised regulatory system that is practical, effective and affordable.

[The Lord Bishop of Wakefield]

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for her response but would like to press a little further. Has the use of such private companies instead of the Royal Military Police increased the risk of attacks by uniformed Afghans on Her Majesty’s government officials protected by armed contractors? I have in mind particularly the recent death of two British soldiers killed by an Afghan man wearing local police uniform. Does the Minister accept that such examples illustrate that it is now time for statutory regulation to ensure that the conduct of PMSCs does not aggravate local attitudes that may turn Her Majesty’s government officials into similar targets?

[Baroness Warsi]

The right reverend Prelate asks a very important question. He may be aware that private security companies are used in very specific tasks: they are used in a defensive not an offensive way, predominantly to protect embassies and provide close protection and sometimes rapid response. That is always done in conjunction with discussions with the states in which we work. The right reverend Prelate will also be aware of our obligations as a state under the Montreux document and the principles laid out in the international code of conduct which governs the conduct of private security companies.

[Lord Wright of Richmond]

My Lords, does the Minister accept that, in my experience, most diplomats regret the occasional need for close protection, whether by private companies or our own security personnel, since it constrains one of the main aims of diplomacy—to develop contacts as widely as possible and at all levels, and to travel round the country and not remain solely in the capital?

[Baroness Warsi]

The noble Lord makes an important point. As many noble Lords—especially those who have been provided with close protection either on behalf of the Government or by private security companies—will be aware, unfortunately it is a necessary part of some of the work that we do overseas. It enables us sometimes to travel beyond the capital to do exactly the kind of work that the noble Lord referred to.

[Lord Chidgey]

Is my noble friend aware that current research at Bristol University by Dr Higate shows that British companies generally operate on a low-profile basis, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their sensitivity to the reactions of the host populations reflects very well on the United Kingdom? Can she also address the serious shortcomings that have been found in the standard of and mandatory training for armed close protection roles undertaken by these private military and security companies?

[Baroness Warsi]

The noble Lord will be aware that many of the concerns in this area are historic and dependent on what happened not so much with UK private security companies but, predominantly, with US private security companies. Despite that, the UK led on the Montreux document, which laid out the obligations that we have. The UK was also one of the first to support the international code of practice, and one-third of the companies that have signed up to the code are British. We are also working with the industry to put forward standards so that the code is properly implemented and its implementation is audited. I am assured that we will be able to make an announcement in the next few weeks.

[Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate]

My Lords, will the Minister comment on how the security industry will be regulated once the Security Industry Authority has been abolished in the bonfire of quangos?

[Baroness Warsi]

The Government are discussing that with the UK auditing service. It will propose an independent auditing body or bodies which will effectively then regulate and ensure that the code is being properly implemented.

[Lord Hamilton of Epsom]

Will my noble friend confirm that one reason why piracy has been reduced so radically is the use of private security companies on merchant shipping going through pirate-infested areas?

[Baroness Warsi]

It has been a contributory factor.

[Lord West of Spithead]

My Lords, is the noble Baroness content that there are adequate RoE and lines of accountability on board merchant vessels if one of those security companies should happen to kill some alleged pirates?

[Baroness Warsi]

I am not sure what the specific answer to that question would be, but I am aware that the whole point of having a code of conduct—and thereafter having international standards against which the code of conduct is implemented, and thereafter having an audit of those standards—is to ensure that there is voluntary acceptance of certain rules of behaviour that have to be applied by all private security companies.

[Lord Hunt of Kings Heath]

My Lords, on that point, having an audit is not a substitute for proper statutory regulation. Will the noble Baroness answer my noble friend’s question? Why are the Government getting rid of that regulation?

[Baroness Warsi]

The Government feel that the best way to proceed in this area is to work on a voluntary system in which the trade organisations and the private security companies working in this area are involved. This is a matter which relates to the private security companies of many countries, and it is therefore important that we have an international standard against which companies can be audited.

[Lord Dobbs]

Is my noble friend aware that British companies operating in this difficult area have a high regard internationally? Can she give us an indication of how much money the British Government spend on those private security companies in the course of a year?

[Baroness Warsi]

I can, my Lords. The specific spend by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on centrally awarded contracts to private security companies was approximately £47 million in 2009-10, £43 million in 2010-11 and £47 million in the current year.