Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 28 October 2009. It occurred during Opposition day on Future of the Territorial Army.
Future of the Territorial Army
It was clearly printed as a result of discussion in which the shadow Chancellor had engaged, and I know for a fact that the Tory Front Benchers were very concerned about that commitment. The hon. Member for Westbury made a number of stringent attacks on me and on my ministerial colleagues. I understand his frustration. If the leader of my party had told General Dannatt that our defence team lacked expertise in defence matters, I would be frustrated as well. That is, of course, what the Leader of the Opposition told General Dannatt about the Conservative Front-Bench team. Let me conclude by making very clear that the Territorial Army and the UK reserve forces are an absolute credit to this country. In the last decade they have proved their worth as never before. As we speak, they are serving alongside our regular forces in Afghanistan, and Afghanistan must come first in terms of defence. That means not only drawing on the Treasury's reserves for the operations themselves, but looking across the defence budget to prioritise the activities that support our efforts in Afghanistan. It means that we must make tough choices on resources, and that is the reason for the process of decision-making in which we have engaged in recent weeks. Nevertheless, I think it right and proper for any Government who make a decision to listen to criticism and to concerns. We have heard representations from across the House. We understand the concerns that have been raised, particularly with regard to Territorial Army retention. We have now received assurances from the Treasury that this year additional ring-fenced money will be made available to ensure that the measures on TA training are no longer required, and the normal TA training regime will be restored as quickly as possible. That is important. As for the future, the Department undertakes an annual planning round in order to prioritise and allocate available resources for the next year. I can confirm today not only that we are making those changes, but that we do not plan to reduce levels of training available to members of the Territorial Army as part of the process. Perhaps Opposition Members would indicate whether they support that approach. Let me make it clear that we are absolutely right to put Afghanistan first. It is not possible to preach austerity, as the Opposition do, and then call foul whenever a measure is proposed to relieve budget pressures. We have listened: responsive government is right. There are those who will criticise us for changing our minds, but there are those who would have criticised us for obstinacy and irresponsibility had we done the opposite. That is politics. We were determined to do the right thing, that is what we have done, and I urge my colleagues to support me in the Chamber this evening. Question put (Standing Order No. 31(2)), That the original words stand part of the Question. The House divided: Ayes 213, Noes 293.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 498 c391-2
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Deployment Finance Pay Peacekeeping operations Staff Training Reserve forces Territorial Army
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:37:54 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_589670
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_589670
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_589670