Oral question asked in the House of Commons, by Crispin Blunt (Conservative). It was answered on Monday, 22 October 2007 on behalf of the Ministry of Defence.

Operational Deployments

Question: Given that 7,700 troops are on deployment in Afghanistan—it is rumoured in NATO that Britain will contribute more troops—and given that our ambassador in Afghanistan has spoken of a commitment that might last three decades, it is simply not reasonable to expect the armed forces to have to budget year on year, on the basis of an indefinite commitment. That money should be structured into the defence budget, and the armed forces should not have to come back to the Treasury, year in, year out for a commitment that is going to last decades.

Answer: If the money for operations was built into the budget, that is exactly what the armed forces would have to do: they would have to budget within that structure. At present, the armed forces are funded to provide the capability required—operations are funded from the reserve—so that they are not put into that position. May I take the opportunity to scotch the rumour on which the hon. Gentleman drew? Unfortunately, the NATO spokesman, Colonel Appathurai—I hope that I have pronounced his name properly—made an error yesterday. I will not read the detail of the document I have received, but I am happy to place it in the Library. Today, however, he gave a clear explanation in a press conference, in which he admitted that he had inadvertently misled the media yesterday, and that there were no such plans to increase the UK contingent.

Secondary information

Type: Oral question
Reference: 465 c3-4
Session: 2006-07
Oral question type: 1st Supplementary
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Armed forces Deployment Finance Peacekeeping operations Afghanistan
Link: View this Oral question on www.publications.parliament.uk