Greenland
Debate between Baroness Chapman of Darlington and Lord Houghton of Richmond
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
That is why there are now contracts out for more such vessels. I draw noble Lords’ attention to the fact that we made some difficult decisions last year about spending. The purpose of that was to increase our spending on defence, which I think is being shown this year to have been the right decision.
Lord Houghton of Richmond (CB)
Given the darkening geopolitical situation and the reality behind the pace at which more money is being spent—frankly, there is this faffing around with the defence investment plan, which is really an exercise in “How can we present to the public something that is shambolic but at least reassuring?”—is there no murmur at all in government that they should take a strategic decision to rapidly change the pace and scale of our own national rearmament? Frankly, without that, all the noise that we generate in this place and in government is frankly laughable.
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
The noble and gallant Lord characterises as “faffing” a new defence industrial strategy, an increase in funding and clear, effective leadership when we inherited the smallest Army since the time of Napoleon.
Ukraine
Debate between Baroness Chapman of Darlington and Lord Houghton of Richmond(1 year, 1 month ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
I can reassure the noble Lord that every engagement we have with every nation on any topic includes a conversation on Ukraine. Our concerns about countries that are in some ways supporting what is happening in Russia and sanctions evasion are discussed in detail and at length. As for where Heads of State decide that they want to spend their time or which conferences they wish to attend, clearly that is a matter for them. If someone wants to attend BRICS rather than CHOGM, that is their choice. However, the noble Lord can be assured that we take every opportunity that we can to make clear that Ukraine is our top foreign policy.
Lord Houghton of Richmond (CB)
Do the Government accept that the principal determinant of the outcome of the war in Ukraine will now be the decisions and actions of the incoming US Administration? Are the Government’s efforts focused on influencing those decisions? If so, do they think that a relatively slow-moving strategic defence review, publicly cost-capped at 2.5% of GDP, represents appropriate national leverage?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
I am very pleased with our strategic defence review, its wide remit and the engagement that it has from not just the MoD but across Whitehall and more widely into academia and elsewhere. It will be a good piece of work. It reports in the spring, and I look forward to it. As for the noble and gallant Lord’s comment about the incoming US Administration being the principal determinant of the outcome of the war, I respectfully disagree. The people who will determine the outcome of this war and where this goes next should be and are the people of Ukraine.
Ukraine: North Korean Troops
Debate between Baroness Chapman of Darlington and Lord Houghton of Richmond(1 year, 2 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Houghton of Richmond (CB)
The effective control of escalation in this conflict appears to be vital. Can the Minister in any way reassure the House that we are a fundamental part of some international mechanism that assesses escalation risk?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
Everything we have done has been with a view to avoiding escalation, because that is the last thing we want to see. However, the reports we have had in recent days are a significant step, and we are deeply concerned. So, our approach will be to discuss the implications of this closely with our partners, as noble Lords would expect.