Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Defence

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Luff Excerpts
Monday 14th November 2011

(12 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Oliver Colvile Portrait Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

3. What the timetable is for the next terms of business agreement.

Peter Luff Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Peter Luff)
- Hansard - -

The terms of business agreements are unique to the maritime sector and reflect our collaborative work with industry to transform the surface ship build and support, and submarine support, areas. The Department has separate TOBAs with BAE Systems Surface Ships and Babcock Marine, both of which are performing well and currently delivering savings in excess of their targeted benefits. These are 15-year agreements and we have not decided whether or how they will be replaced.

Oliver Colvile Portrait Oliver Colvile
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I presume that, under those conditions, the Secretary of State has not had an opportunity to speak to any of the defence industries.

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

We have not yet had any discussions with industry about how these arrangements will be carried forward in future—in some 14 years’ time. However, the TOBAs are performing very well and delivering savings in excess of their expected benefits. I promise my hon. Friend that we will talk very carefully to all those involved, including Plymouth city council and him, about any future arrangements when the time comes, but that is not quite yet, I fear.

Stephen Hammond Portrait Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

4. If he will make it his policy to oppose the creation of an EU operational headquarters.

--- Later in debate ---
Jack Lopresti Portrait Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

12. What assessment he has made of the potential effects on (a) the Army and (b) UK industry of the capability sustainment programme for the Warrior armoured fighting vehicle.

Peter Luff Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Peter Luff)
- Hansard - -

The £1 billion upgrade to the Warrior armoured fighting vehicle is an important step towards meeting the requirements for Future Force 2020. Warrior will remain the backbone of the infantry for the next 30 years. The upgrade represents a step change in capability, ensuring that our forces are equipped to counter the threats of the future. UK industry will benefit from the creation and sustainment of some 600 British jobs within prime contractor Lockheed Martin UK and its supply chain, sustaining both skills and capability within the UK’s armoured vehicle sector.

Jack Lopresti Portrait Jack Lopresti
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I would like to thank my hon. Friend for his answer and to welcome the announced upgrade that will provide our forces with state-of-the-art firepower for the next 25 or 30 years, but will he also ensure that our troops have the kit they need when they need it to do their job as effectively and as safely as possible?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

I am certainly happy to give my hon. Friend that reassurance. I pay tribute to his constituents for playing their part in ensuring that that is achieved both at Thales, which is making the battle group thermal imager for the upgrade and at Defence Equipment and Support itself. I met many staff at Ampthill a week or so ago to celebrate the great success of the Warrior upgrade programme.

Andrew Selous Portrait Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

14. What recent estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of the UK’s operations in Libya.

--- Later in debate ---
Margot James Portrait Margot James (Stourbridge) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

15. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of equipment supplied to troops in Afghanistan.

Peter Luff Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Peter Luff)
- Hansard - -

The provision of equipment for our forces in Afghanistan is regularly reviewed, with new equipment and capabilities being developed and delivered in response to emerging requirements. The military assessment is that our forces are now being provided with the equipment they need to undertake the tasks they are doing and that no missions are being compromised by the inadequacy or unavailability of equipment. Having met both 16 Air Assault Brigade and 3 Commando Brigade after their respective tours in Afghanistan, I know that that view is shared by those on the front line who actually use the equipment.

Margot James Portrait Margot James
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Minister for his response. There has been much criticism of the kit supplied to front-line troops, particularly those on foot patrol in Afghanistan. Will he advise us of any improvements made specifically for those troops on foot patrol to mitigate these threats?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

As I said in my original answer, constant improvements are being made. One of the two that I would highlight has already happened—tier 1 and tier 2 pelvic protection against blast, which is being well received by our own armed services and is now being emulated by the Americans. Secondly, for the future, there is the provision of the light protected patrol vehicle, Foxhound, which will come into service in the early part of next year.

Paul Flynn Portrait Paul Flynn (Newport West) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

What proposals does the Minister have to improve the equipment that will reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries among British troops dealing with improvised explosive devices and bombs?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

I am glad to tell the hon. Gentleman that the third layer of pelvic protection—the tier 3 protection—does precisely that. I can reassure him that work is being done constantly to ensure that those very brave operatives have access to the best possible equipment to do their important task. It is important that they are allowed to disassemble IEDs because they provide vital clues about the tactics of the enemy, which helps prevent further deaths among the widest number of forces serving in Afghanistan.

Stephen Mosley Portrait Stephen Mosley (City of Chester) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

16. How many children received support through the additional pupil premium for children of service families in the latest period for which figures are available.

--- Later in debate ---
Peter Luff Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Peter Luff)
- Hansard - -

The Ministry of Defence’s first responsibility when procuring equipment is to provide the armed forces with the capabilities that they require when they need them, in an affordable and sustainable way. The forthcoming White Paper will set out our approach to acquiring technology, equipment and support for our armed forces, and will explain how we will take action to protect our operational advantages and freedom of action where that is essential for national security.

Diana Johnson Portrait Diana Johnson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think that all Members will recognise the vital strategic importance of having defence production lines in the United Kingdom, as well as the importance of rebalancing the economy through modern manufacturing jobs, private sector jobs and jobs in the regions. What is the Minister doing to protect the skilled jobs and apprenticeships that are likely to go at BAE Systems in Brough? Those workers will find out on Boxing day whether their jobs are going to disappear. What is the Minister doing about it?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

I have to disappoint the hon. Lady, because decisions about where redundancies fall must be made by defence companies and not by Ministers. I understand her concern about what has happened at Brough, and she will understand what BAE Systems said, in public, about the underlying reasons for the changes. [Interruption.] I can answer the sedentary question from those on the Opposition Front Bench by saying that the White Paper, which will set out our approach in more detail and will help hon. Lady to understand the issues more fully, will be published next month.

Julian Brazier Portrait Mr Julian Brazier (Canterbury) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I fully understand the difficult balance that my hon. Friend is trying to strike between securing the best value for our forces and protecting key capabilities, but may I urge him to look carefully at French industrial strategy? When we are collaborating with a country that has an activist industrial policy, there is a real danger that our procurement policy will end up following French industrial strategy unless we are fully aware of what is happening on the other side.

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

Some Members may well find themselves in considerable sympathy with what my hon. Friend has said. Let me simply say that when I engage in discussions with my French opposite numbers, such issues are always at the forefront of my mind, and they will continue to be so—for instance, at the summit that is to be held in December.

Alison Seabeck Portrait Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Moor View) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Minister will be aware that the global financial crisis is causing a number of nations to take defence work back in-house, partly in order to protect their own work forces. Others, such as Italy, are seeking to renegotiate contracts, which is leaving UK firms of all sizes open to potential job losses. The Minister’s answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson) provided no reassurance that the Government were doing everything that should be done to protect British business overseas. In fact, what we heard was far from reassuring: it was about passing the buck back to industry. Will the Minister please reassure us that he will do all that can be done to support British industry?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

With respect, the hon. Lady’s question is rather different from the one asked by the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson). When it comes to helping British businesses overseas, I think that this Government’s track record compares very favourably indeed with that of the lot opposite when they were in power, and I am happy to tell them that the reason the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Mr Howarth)—the Minister responsible for international security strategy—is not present today is that he is at the Dubai air show doing precisely that. Moreover, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State was in Japan a couple of weeks ago, making the case for the Eurofighter Typhoon. We are doing a very good job speaking up for British industry overseas: a damn sight better job than the Opposition did.

Mark Menzies Portrait Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

One of the most important defence manufacturing businesses in the UK is BAE Systems in Warton, which is in my constituency and is the home of the Typhoon. Will the Minister update the House on the Government’s efforts to support that world-leading product?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - -

We are working strenuously to support the product, although I think that in many senses it speaks for itself. What we are doing is ensuring that the wider world recognises the outstanding performance of the Eurofighter Typhoon in the activities over Libya, where it has shown itself to be superior in all respects to every other aircraft in the world today. That is the message that we are taking to India and Japan, and that we are delivering in our many other export campaigns. I am hopeful that we will achieve success in many of them, for the aircraft certainly deserves that success.

Philip Hollobone Portrait Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

18. What steps his Department is taking in co-operation with other countries to develop future defence initiatives against Iran and to prevent the build-up of that country's nuclear weapons technology.

--- Later in debate ---
Graham P Jones Portrait Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In recent weeks, BAE Systems has made it absolutely clear that the reason that there are 3,000 job losses is the slow-down in the Eurofighter order. In the light of that, can the Secretary of State clarify the Chancellor’s comments to the House on 1 November? When asked about job losses by the hon. Member for Fylde (Mark Menzies), who is in his place, he replied that the job losses reflect the fact that

“the US defence budget had an impact on BAE Systems.”—[Official Report, 1 November 2011; Vol. 534, c. 758.]

Will the Secretary of State clarify which UK-US defence cuts the Chancellor was referring to?

Penny Mordaunt Portrait Penny Mordaunt (Portsmouth North) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T5. There are reports that the Department’s medal review has been stopped and that an independent review will now commence. Can the Minister assure me that that will not cause further delays to veterans, such as those of the Arctic convoys, in getting a decision and that no service personnel facing redundancy will miss out on the diamond jubilee medal?