Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 26 October 2009. It occurred during Urgent question on Territorial Army.


Territorial Army

The hon. Gentleman knows full well how the reserve operates. Most of the cost of operations is met from the Treasury reserve, but the defence budget still meets some of the cost. Where activity would take place regardless of operations, the defence budget meets the cost even if the activity directly supports operational capability. That was the case under the last Government, and it is the case under this Government. The reality is that we face increased pressures this year, including due to increased numbers coming into the Army, which we welcome, as well as less income from estates disposal and as a result of exchange rate fluctuations. Reading between the lines of the hon. Gentleman's contribution, I think that he actually welcomes the minor adjustment we have announced today. It is one that has been called for from those on the Opposition Benches. I also have to say that it ill behoves the Opposition—whom, let us remember, are not proposing one additional penny of expenditure within the defence budget—to urge us to prioritise efforts in Afghanistan and then to cry foul as soon as that leads to difficult decisions. That is dishonest and disingenuous, and it ill serves our TA. [Interruption.] ... Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. It is the policy proposition that I believe is dishonest.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
498 c24 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Territorial Army Deployment Finance Training Reserve forces Afghanistan
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk