Oral Answers to Questions

Bambos Charalambous Excerpts

Monday 23rd April 2018 Commons Chamber

[Guto Bebb]

I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed by my hon. Friend. I think it is fair to say that when Ministers—including me—meet our opposite numbers from the European Union, they stress the need for other EU countries that are in NATO to fulfil the 2% obligation. It is interesting to note that some of the Baltic states, for example, are very clear about their commitment, but we need some of the larger players in Europe to fulfil their obligations as well.

[Bambos Charalambous (Enfield, Southgate) (Lab)]

9. What recent discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the adequacy of funding for his Department.

[Mr Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) (Con)]

15. What recent discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on future funding for his Department.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Secretary of State for Defence (Gavin Williamson)]

I have regular discussions with the Chancellor and, as the Prime Minister announced last month, the Ministry of Defence will benefit from an extra £800 million in the current financial year, including £600 million for the Dreadnought submarine programme. The Government are committed to spending at least 2% of GDP on defence, and the defence budget will rise by at least 0.5% above inflation in every year of this Parliament. The modernising defence programme will ensure that our armed forces have the right processes and capabilities to address evolving threats.

[Bambos Charalambous]

In a recent report, the Defence Committee said:

“We seriously doubt the MOD’s ability to generate the efficiencies required to deliver the equipment plan.”

How can we have confidence in the Government’s ability to deliver, even with an enhanced budget, when the modernising defence programme is seemingly focused on efficiencies and the budget is already over-reliant on projected savings?

[Gavin Williamson]

Part of the reason behind the modernising defence programme is to look at how we can drive inefficiencies out of the system, ensure that we deliver on the commitments we need to make, and see how to respond to the changing threat environment. That is why we took the decision to take defence out of the national security capability review, as we recognised that we need flexibility in the system to deal with the changing threat picture.