Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton and Richard Graham

Monday 25th March 2019 Commons Chamber

[Mark Lancaster]

I answered that question earlier and, with respect to the hon. Lady, she clearly did not listen to the answer I just gave her. Applications are up; there is the start of a process. One of the confusions the House has is that we talk about trained strength, which is the number—93% manned in respect of the Army—but that is after a very long process of going through not only basic training but, for example, for Royal Engineers also combat engineer training and then trade training. So this can take up to 18 months from the first time somebody puts a uniform on and considers themselves to be part of the Army. Those in training do not go home and say “I’m not in the Army because I am not fully trade trained yet.” There are some 5,000 soldiers now in that process who are wearing a uniform but are not included in the numbers; in time they will join the Army and we are seeing that uplift. It is the time lag that this House is not fully understanding, but I understand why.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

In terms of the effectiveness of recruitment, my right hon. Friend will know that we recruit many armed forces servicemen and women from the Commonwealth, but is he aware of the Royal British Legion campaign to eliminate the current high costs of their applications for indefinite leave to remain, to which they are eligible after four years’ service? This can cost almost £10,000 for a family of four; does my right hon. Friend agree it is time that this issue was tackled in order that we recruit more from the Commonwealth?

[Mark Lancaster]

My hon. Friend raises a very important issue and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is engaging with the Home Office in an attempt to solve it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton and Richard Graham

Monday 26th November 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mark Lancaster]

The hon. Gentleman obviously missed the Secretary of State’s announcement this week that we will be keeping the three batch 1 offshore patrol vessels.

[Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con)]

17. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a balance be struck between asserting our right to free passage in international waters and not unnecessarily aggravating strategic partners? Does he agree that the Royal Navy should bear that in mind carefully when planning ship routes through the South China sea?

[Mark Lancaster]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I would like to think that we do find that balance. We have made three passages through the South China sea in recent months, and we are absolutely right to exercise our freedom of navigation rights.