John Healey
Main Page: John Healey (Labour - Rawmarsh and Conisbrough)Department Debates - View all John Healey's debates with the Ministry of Defence
(1 day, 10 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
Before I answer, I want to thank our British personnel who are working 24/7 in the middle east, at home and around the world to protect British lives. For our part, we are working flat out to settle the defence investment plan, which is a plan for the 10-year transformation of Britain’s defence, as laid out in the strategic defence review. We are fixing a military programme that, when we came into government, was over-committed, underfunded and unsuited to the threats and conflicts we now face.
Dr Shastri-Hurst
I draw the House’s attention to my former role as the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for defence technology. When I was at Sandhurst, when we would talk about punctuality, the colour sergeant would often say to us, “Three minutes early is two minutes late.” When it comes to the defence investment plan, it feels more like “on the bus, off the bus.” Can the Secretary of State confirm whether it will be published before the House rises on 26 March?
We will settle this defence investment plan. Unlike the plans we have seen recently from previous Governments, it will be affordable and deliverable. The hon. Gentleman knows from his time in service—he gave an anecdote from Sandhurst—that over 14 years, Tory Governments hollowed out the armed forces; we are turning that around. We are putting £270 billion into defence in this Parliament, which is the biggest increase in defence spending since the end of the cold war. We are delivering for defence, and delivering for Britain.
Ian Roome
We are still waiting for the defence investment plan, and according to the strategic defence review, items should be deleted from that plan only on the advice of the national armaments director; service chiefs must advise the Secretary of State if anything is to be removed from the defence to-do list. Has the Secretary of State received any such advice? I understand that it is a draft plan at the moment, but it must be finished.
This is a whole-of-Defence effort; we are working flat out to deliver the defence investment plan. It will put into practice the 10-year vision that the strategic defence review set out in June last year, as the hon. Gentleman mentions. When we have that completed, we will report that to the House.
Ben Obese-Jecty
The delay to the defence investment plan is obviously having a huge effect on our capabilities, and the plan is in danger of being overtaken by events. We are waiting for approval on the block 2 procurement of underwater uncrewed vessels and the mine countermeasures, hydrographic and patrol capability programme. The Prime Minister has confirmed that there are autonomous mine-clearing vessels in the Gulf. Are the vessels currently in the region deployable? What support ship will support them, given that HMS Stirling Castle left Portsmouth this morning, and will take at least three weeks to get to the region?
The hon. Gentleman is the last person in the House to expect me to set out the detail of those sorts of operational arrangements in public. The defence investment plan is not holding up important investment decisions. We have awarded more than 1,200 major contracts since the election, and we have seen a significant increase in defence investment in businesses in his region of the east of England. I think the House would expect him to welcome that.
This Government are making a record investment in defence, and steelworkers in my constituency will want to be assured that we are committed to using as much UK steel as possible as we invest. Will the Secretary of State commit to that?
A principle of the investment that this Labour Government are making is that we will direct British defence investment first to British jobs, British businesses and British innovation, and we will ensure that the supply chains reflect that policy and political commitment, because we are determined that this increase in defence investment will bring a defence dividend to all parts of the country, including Wales. That is measured in good jobs and future opportunities.
Mr Bayo Alaba (Southend East and Rochford) (Lab)
As a former Parachute Regiment reservist, I warmly welcome the Government’s clear focus on strengthening our armed forces and their defensive capability. Although the appetite for service remains high, the bureaucracy we inherited is holding back recruitment. Will the Secretary of State outline the steps that his Department is taking to support more working adults in joining the volunteer reserve forces?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have swept away some of the long-standing rules that got in the way of people being recruited into the forces. There is no shortage of those who want to join, including young people, but the system has too often been too slow and bureaucratic, and it has raised unnecessary barriers to getting a range of talent into our armed forces for the future.
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s comments about the defence investment plan, and his leadership on increased defence spending. Does he agree that a defence finance and investment strategy is key to unlocking the capital that firms across the supply chain need, if they are to deliver for the DIP? Will he therefore update the House on when the DFIS will be published?
I agree that the strategy is key; my hon. Friend is entirely right. This capital is matched by the biggest increase in defence spending from public investment and the public purse since the end of the cold war. We are ensuring that it leverages in not just additional sources of private investment, but record foreign direct investment. We have had £3.2 billion into this country since the election, and have had the most successful British exports year on record, winning fresh business, fresh contracts and fresh opportunities for British innovators and businesses.
I am not sure that the Secretary of State heard the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri-Hurst), which was incredibly simple: will the defence investment plan be published before the House rises on 26 March?
We are working flat out to conclude the defence investment plan. The hon. Gentleman was the Minister for Defence Procurement who left defence programmes overcommitted, underfunded and unsuited to the threats and conflicts that we face, so he will be aware of the scale and significance of the challenge that we are determined to meet.
There is a reason why that date matters: it is the date when purdah commences before the Scottish elections. Then we will have the Welsh and local elections. It is our understanding—and the Secretary of State is welcome to correct this—that the defence investment plan cannot be published during purdah. If that is the case, and if it is not published before the rise of the House on 26 March, we will not see it until well into May. That is why this question is so important.
I ask the Secretary of State the question again, because he has failed to answer it so far. It is a very simple, straight question, and it needs a straight answer. Will the defence investment plan be published before the House rises for the recess—yes or no?
As the Prime Minister said, it will be published as soon as it is ready. This is not holding up major investments; there have been more than 1,200 major investments in contracts awarded since the election—and 86% of those contracts were awarded to British-based businesses, so we are boosting British security and the British economy at the same time.
James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)
Liberal Democrats share concerns about the whereabouts of the defence investment plan, and urge the Government to come forward with its publication. Last year’s strategic defence review also promised a defence readiness Bill, which would give Governments the power to mobilise industry and reserves in a crisis, and would require proper reporting on our warfighting readiness, so that the House and the country were not in the dark. At a time when senior military figures have warned repeatedly that Britain is not ready for war, my question is this: if the threat is urgent, why is the legislation not? If the Secretary of State cannot tell us when he will publish the defence investment plan, can he tell us when he will introduce the defence readiness Bill?
I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s interest in the issue. He will recognise that, as was pointed out in the strategic defence review, this is a question for the whole of society and the whole of Government. Preparation for greater defence readiness, and greater societal and economic readiness, is going on at present, alongside the work that we are doing in defence with other parts of Government to ensure that we can deliver the defence investment plan. We will then be able to deliver, in due course, a defence readiness Bill.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
At the election, military morale had fallen to record lows, and we promised, as a new Government, to renew the nation’s commitment to those who serve. That is what we are doing. We have delivered the biggest forces pay increase for two decades, and landmark investment to buy back and renew nearly 40,000 military family homes. Wraparound childcare has been extended for those serving overseas. When we say that we are a Government on the side of our forces, this is what we mean.
Luke Murphy
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his answer. As part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I was recently privileged to spend time in the High North, in Norway, with our Royal Marines and other armed forces personnel. It was a stark reminder of their service, and the sacrifice that they make to protect our national interests and our way of life. What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the overseas allowance for personnel on temporary duty, like those in the Arctic?
I will write to my hon. Friend with the detail, but part of the commitment that we have made to renewing the contract with those who serve has involved the extension of wraparound childcare to those serving overseas. It is part of making sure that we raise the quality of the experience of those in uniform. We can raise the morale of those who serve and, in doing so, we can help deal with the deep-seated, 14-year-long recruitment and retention crisis that we saw at the time of the last general election.
I thank the Secretary of State for his answers. Personnel and families from Northern Ireland face exceptional costs if they are stationed here on the mainland. If they want to meet up with their family or go home again, there are extra costs for them. What has been done to ensure that personnel from Northern Ireland are not disadvantaged because they live so far away from their family, and to ensure that families can have the family time that they need to ensure that they stay together?
The hon. Gentleman will have welcomed the “get home” allowance that we made sure every one of our serving personnel could access at Christmas for the first time. We have delivered the highest pay increase for forces personnel for 20 years. The more than 10% pay rise over the first two years of this Government is part of making service life more affordable, including for those in Northern Ireland. I am proud to be the first Defence Secretary of this country who can say that no one working full time in UK military uniform is paid less than the national living wage.
Will we look at the Royal Gibraltar Regiment as well, Secretary of State?
Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)
Our outstanding armed forces are in the middle east, protecting our people, our interests and our allies. The Royal Air Force has now conducted over 550 hours of defensive operations in five countries, and drones have been shot down by UK forces almost daily. We now have more jets flying in the region than at any time in the last 15 years.
Lizzi Collinge
I thank the Secretary of State for his answer. About 10 days ago, we saw alleged attacks by both US and Iranian forces on water desalination plants in the middle east, which is in direct contravention of international law. Civilians in the middle east are reliant on desalinated water for survival, and targeting it is absolutely unacceptable. Can the Secretary of State confirm that UK forces operating in the middle east continue to operate fully under international law, and that we condemn operations that target civilian infrastructure?
My hon. Friend is right: Iran’s widespread strikes have shown a total disregard for civilian life. Because I strengthened British defences in the region ahead of this conflict with extra jets, radars and defence systems, from day one we have been co-ordinating defensive actions, with a sound legal basis, to protect British citizens and bases, and our allies in the region. I am proud of the skill and dedication that our armed forces are showing in the middle east.
I have constituents at RAF Akrotiri who have been deployed out of RAF Cosford in my constituency, and I have already had correspondence from concerned constituents and their families. The Iranian regime has a very potent chemical and biological weapons programme. I have asked the Defence Secretary this question before: will he confirm that there is CBRN—chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear—protective kit at Akrotiri and other UK armed forces military bases in the region? The Iranian regime also has a very potent submarine fleet—it may not be nuclear or Trident-led, as ours is, but it is nevertheless a significant threat in the region—so could he say what he is doing to address both those threats?
The right hon. Gentleman is right about the range of threats that the Iranian regime poses, especially, as we have seen, as it hits back after the first wave of strikes. Those hits are widespread, they hit countries not involved in the conflict and they are directed at civilian, not just military targets. I say to his constituents living as well as serving in Akrotiri that when I was out there about 10 days ago I made a point of asking our base commander if there was anything further he needed from us back in Britain, and he said, “I have got everything that I asked for to protect ourselves.”
After having insulted Great Britain for our response in not joining his war and then claiming that he did not need British help after having “already won” the war, President Donald Trump has now sent an SOS to the world, including to the UK and other NATO allies, to help him protect the strait of Hormuz. I think it is in our national interests to stop the disruption to global shipping, because otherwise that will drive up the cost of goods and the cost of living for my Slough constituents and others across the country. Will the Secretary of State clarify what the Government’s response will be to the US President’s request? How will my right hon. Friend ensure the safety of British armed forces personnel if they are to engage in any such operations?
As the Prime Minister said this morning, in fact—my hon. Friend is right—the strait of Hormuz is vital. It is vital to the international economy and to security. We are in continued conversations with European allies and the US. These questions are complex, and any plans must be multilateral, with as many nations taking part as possible. Without going into detailed operational options or discussions, I have already said that we have prepositioned in the region autonomous minehunting capabilities. We have counter-drone systems in action in the region, pulling down drones. Looking ahead, alongside industry, we are looking at additional innovative options, including interceptor drones for the middle east.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
Ministers were all over the airwaves this weekend saying two things: first, that they would like to see a de-escalation of the conflict in the middle east; and, secondly, that they would like to see the strait of Hormuz secured for shipping. Why on earth does the Secretary of State think that those two aims are mutually exclusive? If they are mutually exclusive, how can he achieve both?
Quite simply, we will do so by making a major contribution, as we are, to discussions about any multinational plans that may be put in place to safeguard for the future the commercial shipping that is the lifeline both of the international economy and of international security.
David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
British personnel in Cyprus, Bahrain, Iraq and across the middle east have been attacked by Iran and its proxies. In such circumstances, we must act quickly to protect our people and interests. Having served on Royal Navy vessels, I know it takes time to ready a ship, yet nearly two weeks passed before the Government sent a single destroyer— HMS Dragon—to help defend our forces in Cyprus. Why was that decision not taken sooner, and given that the Royal Navy had advised deploying assets earlier, which Minister took the decision not to act on that point?
I strengthened UK defences ahead of the conflict. Once the scale and nature of the indiscriminate and widespread Iranian response became clear and the circumstances were changing, we altered and adopted further actions. The deployment of HMS Dragon was part of that. I took the decision to give that go-ahead on the same day the Chief of the Defence Staff offered that to Ministers as an option. The hon. Gentleman served as a reservist in the Navy—[Interruption.] Sorry, he served as a regular in the Navy. If he is concerned about the state of the British Navy, he really should look at the record of his own Government: they cut the total number of frigates and destroyers by a quarter; they cut minehunters by more than half; and they cut defence spending by £12 billion in their first five years. It is our job now to fix those problems. Whereas they were cutting and hollowing out our armed forces, we are rebuilding them for the future.
David Reed
This is an important point and, given the volatility of the international system, we must learn from our mistakes. In a written answer on 9 March, the Minister for the Armed Forces confirmed that discussions took place before the decision to deploy HMS Dragon. We know those conversations happened and that the Royal Navy put forward recommendations. When British personnel are under threat, those delays carry consequences. I ask again: will the Secretary of State tell the House which Minister chose not to act on that advice sooner, and, crucially, why?
As I have said to the House more than once, and as the Chief of the Defence Staff said on the BBC the weekend before last, the day the deployment was put to Ministers as an option, in the circumstances of conflict that were changing at the time, we adapted our actions to protect British lives, to protect British allies and to protect citizens right across the region.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
With all eyes on the middle east, this House expects, and I am determined to ensure, that we will continue to confront the growing threats in the High North, to fulfil our obligations to NATO and to step up support for Ukraine. I can confirm today that over the last month, we have delivered to Ukraine 3,500 drones, 18,000 artillery rounds and 3 million rounds of small ammunition. We face two conflicts on two continents, supported by an axis of aggression with similar tactics and similar technologies. I say this to the Ukrainian people on behalf of the UK: we will not forget the war in Europe, and our total determination to stand with Ukraine remains steadfast. We will welcome President Zelensky to this country tomorrow.
Evidence presented to the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee shows that if the war in Europe is expanded, Russian submarines pose a significant threat to oil and gas tankers, pipelines and installations in the North sea. What is the Government’s plan to address this significant threat to our oil and gas supplies?
I praise my hon. Friend’s chairmanship of the Committee. He is absolutely right: as the strategic defence review said last year, Russia poses an immediate and pressing threat to this country. The UK and allies’ navies monitor, shadow and surveil activities of the Russian navy, and we are stepping up our surveillance of any activity close to our oil installations and pipelines.
I hope the hon. Lady’s constituents and other Ukrainian families will be reassured by the response this afternoon in the House. Despite all eyes being on the middle east, we are determined to continue to stand with Ukraine and to step up our support for Ukraine alongside allies including the US.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
First, on behalf of the House may I congratulate my hon. Friend on receiving in Ukraine earlier this month the presidential Order of Merit for her work on this area? We are supporting a new tracing mechanism being used in Ukraine, and since September it has already identified an extra 600 children stolen by the Russians and forcibly held, and attempted indoctrination of the exact kind that my hon. Friend is campaigning against.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
My hon. Friend the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry did not just mention the record export deal that we managed to secure with Turkey—£8 billion-worth that will be boosting the British economy, principally in the hon. Gentleman’s part of the north-west. The hon. Gentleman also fails to welcome the investment of half a billion pounds in new radars for the Typhoons. This is part of building up our UK defence base and part of a 15% increase under this Government in defence investment going to his region.
Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)
Order. The answers will come from the Government side, not the Opposition.
We invested £8 billion more in defence in our first year than the Conservative Government did in their last year, with a total of £270 billion into defence in this Parliament alone and a vision for the next 10 years set out in our strategic defence review.
Michael Payne (Gedling) (Lab)
In just 18 months this Government have ended the disastrous 1996 Tory privatisation of military housing, which cost the taxpayer billions of pounds. We have repaired 1,000 military homes in the poorest condition ahead of schedule, and we have kick-started a landmark £9 billion repair and renewal of 36,000 forces homes. Does the Minister agree that this is more action in 18 months than the last lot managed in 14 years?
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
In 2020, the now Prime Minister proposed legislation to ensure that any UK military action could take place only if there were a legal justification, a viable objective and the consent of the Commons. Does the Secretary of State endorse the principles outlined by his party leader, and will he therefore support my Armed Conflict (Requirements) Bill?
I am very happy to look at the hon. Lady’s Bill, but in recent weeks the Prime Minister has reasserted exactly the basis on which any UK military forces are committed into conflict.
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
Many United States service personnel from RAF Lakenheath and RAF Mildenhall live off base in Bury St Edmunds. Three planes from Lakenheath were shot down in friendly fire over Kuwait last week. Fortunately, the pilots were rescued. Mildenhall is home to a large fleet of aerial refuelling tankers. I do not know whether it was a tanker from Mildenhall that was lost, but I do know that there are six grieving families right now. Will the Secretary of State join me in extending our support and sincere condolences to our brave United States families? Wherever they are, they are in our thoughts.
I will indeed. My hon. Friend speaks for the House, and it is a message that I made sure the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, heard directly from me on behalf of the UK people.
The Secretary of State is a former distinguished Treasury Minister. Government is about taking decisions when things change. It is welcome that the Chancellor has addressed the heating oil crisis, but what will the Secretary of State do to make the Chancellor come to terms with the changes over the last few weeks, and to provide some additional support so that the defence investment plan will do justice to his ambitions?
The right hon. Gentleman is right about the rising demands on defence. That point was reflected in the Prime Minister’s speech to the Munich conference last month, in which he said that
“hard power...is the currency of the age”.
We know that we need to spend more faster.
David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)
Last month, I joined several Members from across the House in Ukraine for the fourth anniversary of Putin’s illegal invasion. The mood was very different from the previous year, after an extremely harsh winter and Putin’s bombardment of the power networks. Can the Secretary of State give assurances that we will not only stand by Ukraine with everything going on in the middle east, but help them and support them in fixing key infrastructure, so that 400,000 people in Kyiv are not living without power?
My hon. Friend is right, and I welcome the visit that he paid to Ukraine. We are indeed doing what we can to help Ukraine defend its critical civilian infrastructure targeted by Putin, and we are stepping up our military support to Ukraine in the way I have reported to the House today.
I have just returned from visiting Ukraine last week. It is clear to me that Ukraine still needs help with procurement of missiles, interceptors and sanctions on the shadow fleet, but the role of the US also remains critical. Does the Secretary of State think that it really helps persuade the US to stay strong on Ukraine, when, as a close ally, the UK U-turns over the use of our air bases to attack Iran?
The decision to accept the fresh US request to use our bases in order to strike Iran’s missile location was clearly set out at the time. I welcome—the House welcomes—her visit to Ukraine. In our support of Ukraine, it is enormously encouraging that Members from both sides of the House are regularly in Ukraine to reinforce this country’s continued support for its fight against Putin.
Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)
Following last week’s welcome announcement of defence investment in Scotland, will the Minister provide an update on the plan to take forward Programme Euston at Faslane? Does he agree that the skilled workforce at the Methil yard in my constituency, which was saved by this Government, will provide excellent capacity to deliver that vital contract?
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
Further to the question from the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, the hon. Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), offshore energy infrastructure needs to be protected. The strategic defence review did not specifically mention moveable assets such as platforms, floating production, storage and offloading units, or rigs. Can the Secretary of State confirm that they will be considered as part of our energy security, and what will the Ministry of Defence do to ensure their security now and in the future?
On the contrary, the strategic defence review placed greater emphasis on the need to step up our homeland security and defence. That includes the critical undersea infrastructure on which we depend.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry mentioned Exercise Titan Storm in the context of Ajax. On 1 January, I asked the Ministry of Defence a named-day question—which was due an answer by 7 January—about how many noise and vibration injuries had been sustained up to Exercise Titan Storm. Before Defence Ministers leave the Chamber, may I ask for your advice on how best to elicit an answer, which is now over two months late?