Oral question asked in the House of Lords, by Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench). It was answered on Monday, 22 March 2010.

Defence: Nimrod Crash

Question: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, who was Defence Secretary at the time, says that he accepts full responsibility for the efficiency targets that he set for the Defence Logistics Organisation. He went on to say that Haddon-Cave made no attempt to interview Ministers, so, ""it was particularly unfair and unjust to name General Cowan … the first ever Chief of Defence Logistics, and his successor, Air Chief Marshal Pledger".—[Official Report, 16/12/09; col. 1607.]" Do Her Majesty’s Government agree with the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, and, if not, why not?

Answer: My Lords, the Government accept the position that my noble friend Lord Robertson set out about responsibility for the cuts. He was clear that it was the intention of the Government of the day that efficiencies should be achieved. However, we will not comment on what my noble friend said about the individuals concerned. He offers a view from the evidence, and that is the only evidence that we have. We do not believe that it makes sense to second-guess the inquiry and we will not do so.

Secondary information

Type: Oral question
Reference: 718 c751-2
Session: 2009-10
Oral question type: Supplementary
Chamber / Committee: House of Lords chamber
Subjects: Defence Accidents Expenditure Peacekeeping operations Afghanistan Defence Logistics Organisation Nimrod aircraft Nimrod Review Pledger, Malcolm Cowan, Sam
Link: View this Oral question on www.publications.parliament.uk