Oral Answers to Questions

Gerald Howarth Excerpts

Monday 5th July 2010 Commons Chamber

[Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con)]

3. What recent progress has been made on the reform of NATO.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Gerald Howarth)]

In 2009, NATO agreed a series of measures to improve working practices in its headquarters in Brussels, and a new defence planning process better to help allies develop, acquire and maintain the capabilities required for the full range of NATO missions. Work to reform NATO’s resource management, rationalise its agencies and streamline its command structures is also under way, and should be agreed by the NATO summit in Lisbon in November.

[Bob Stewart]

Will the new structure that is in place in NATO be altered again so that we get better results from our operations out of area, particularly in Afghanistan?

[Mr Howarth]

My hon. and gallant Friend makes a very good point, and at the NATO Defence Ministers’ summit last month my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary made it clear that command structure reform is a key priority for the United Kingdom and for the alliance, because NATO’s structure is too big and static, and too much is simply not geared up for the missions that we are undertaking, such as in Afghanistan. The House might like to ponder on the fact that, significantly, NATO did not employ elements of its command structure in any meaningful capacity in Afghanistan; instead, it put together a bespoke operation.

[Sir Peter Tapsell (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)]

As the role of NATO in Afghanistan is increasingly criticised and the threat of terrorism here comes far more from our own disaffected Muslims than from the Tora Bora mountains, is it not rather bizarre that from on high we have heard recently that there are likely to be cuts in our counter-terrorist units here while we continue to sacrifice the precious, heroic lives of our young people in an unnecessary and unwinnable war against the Pashtun tribes?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I know that in the reply from the Front Bench the hon. Gentleman will of course refer to the reform of NATO.

[Mr Howarth]

I have quite a few challenges, Mr Speaker, but that is one that I am not entirely geared up to meet in the light of the observations and question from my hon. Friend. His views are well known and I have a huge admiration for him, but I have to tell him that I am not responsible for the resources that are devoted to counter-terrorist operations. None the less, I can tell him that there is a very clear view from the Government Front Benchers here that the mission in Afghanistan is a NATO mission. It is not an American mission; it is not even an Anglo-American mission. It is a NATO mission, and it is extremely important that that mission succeeds.

[Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)]

4. What estimate he has made of his Department’s expenditure on military equipment in 2010-11; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)]

T2. With defence exports being of critical importance to the economy in Fylde and jobs in the north-west, can the Secretary of State update me and the House on efforts made to drive the export potential of the Typhoon Eurofighter?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Gerald Howarth)]

I can tell my hon. Friend that the good news is that the Typhoon aircraft, a formidable piece of kit, is in demand across the world, and there are a number of countries that have expressed serious interest in the Typhoon. I can also tell him that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already had a number of discussions with a number of interested parties, and that we shall arrange some cross-departmental ministerial visits to promote this very important aspect of our policy.

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

T9. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is absolutely essential that the training of the three armed forces should be integrated into one site?