---

Territorial Army

I would like to ask three simple questions. First, the Government have previously told us that they ""always finance our military commitments overseas out of the reserve."—[Official Report, 5 February 2009; Vol. 487, c. 1083.]" Then the Secretary of State said last week:""We are adjusting the core defence budget to reprioritise Afghanistan".—[Official Report, 15 October 2009; Vol. 497, c. 469.]" Some of us are surprised that it was not already the No.1 priority, but if it is fully funded from the reserve, as the Government say, why are they cutting the core TA budget by £43 million? Secondly, we know that, due to the recession and the major recruitment drive in the past year, there are more recruits in the regular Army than there is money to train them, and the Government have now demanded savings from other parts of the Army. Why did the Government not plan to fund their own target numbers for recruitment, especially in the middle of a war? Thirdly, do the Government really understand the ethos of volunteering or the effect their plans could have on future available numbers? For many, the TA is a habit; break the habit, break the TA. Pre-deployment training is only of use if we have the numbers to start with. Is it not the case that pre-deployment training is meant to augment, not supplant, routine TA training, so routine training is just as important as pre-deployment training? Whether or not an individual is deploying on operations, regular and routine training is required to ensure medium and long-term readiness in the TA for any future deployments to Afghanistan, or elsewhere. These proposals are a shambles. They must be reversed.