Migrant Crossings: Role of the Military

Debate between Desmond Swayne and James Heappey

Tuesday 18th January 2022 Commons Chamber

[James Heappey]

First, the OPV fleet is well deployed around the world. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, Trent is in Gibraltar having just got back from autumn in the gulf of Guinea; Medway is in the Caribbean; Forth is in the Falklands; and Tamar and Spey are in the south Pacific and far east. Further, three batch 1 OPVs continue and are routinely deployed in home waters. That is not just for fishery protection, as he sought to characterise; they routinely take on the role of fleet-ready escort and are used for whatever is required to protect the United Kingdom’s interests in her home waters, and this task clearly comes within that bracket.

I am disappointed that the right hon. Gentleman felt it necessary to ask whether the men and women of the Royal Navy would still feel bound by their compulsion under the safety of life at sea convention. Of course they would. The Chief of the Defence Staff is a sailor, and Rear Admiral Utley is obviously a sailor, and they have been clear throughout that military involvement is about delivering a robust plan, but they will not endanger life at sea.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about how this is all reflected in Government policy and ownership of policy. I reflect back to him that Rear Admiral Utley is a sailor working within the MOD for a part of our border protection that has been placed into the hands of the Royal Navy. He clearly reports through his chain of command to the Secretary of State for Defence, but that is not the totality of the Government’s migration policy nor the totality of the role of protecting our borders. Obviously, the Home Secretary owns the wider system and she is doing a good job in doing that.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

Did Operation Sophia in the Mediterranean not teach us that increased efficiency of interception leads to an increased number of attempted crossings? This policy will have the reverse effect of that intended, won’t it?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Desmond Swayne and James Heappey

Monday 3rd February 2020 Commons Chamber

[James Heappey]

I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s offer of assistance. I assure him that all three potential basing options are still being considered. I would welcome the opportunity to meet him and other interested colleagues in the very near future.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

18. What steps he is taking to maintain strategic defence manufacturing capability in the UK.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (James Heappey)]

Our approach to procurement recognises the need to assure the UK’s operational advantage and freedom of action in relation to certain capabilities.

[Sir Desmond Swayne]

What about Cobham?

[James Heappey]

In addition to measures to protect national security, the Government have secured legally binding commitments that there will be significant protection of jobs in the UK, that Cobham’s headquarters will remain in the UK, and that there will be guaranteed spend on research and development. Of course, this is not just a one-way street. I draw my right hon. Friend’s attention to the acquisition by BAE Systems of two very high-tech and interesting companies in America last week.