Proceeding contribution from Julian Lewis (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 20 November 2013. It occurred during Debate on bill on Defence Reform Bill.
Defence Reform Bill
If the hon. Gentleman had not been absent, he would have heard the great deal of discussion that took place about the priority of defence in the nation’s schedule of priorities. If he had made that bogus, so-called point of order having been here, I would have had some time for him, but given that he did not even have the courtesy to listen to the debate before making it, it was unworthy.
The reality is that a nation gets the defence forces it is prepared to pay for and it can decide what level of services it will fund—whether that involves cuts in the Army, the Royal Navy or the Royal Air Force that could be avoided.
The next question is whether this scheme for the Reserves was linked to the proposed cut in the size of the Army. As I said, if this scheme had been put forward on its own, I could have wholeheartedly supported it, but it was not. It was specifically put forward as a compensating factor for the Army’s Regular strength being reduced by 20,000. We were told that that reduction would be compensated for by the 30,000 increase in Reserves. Now we are told that that linkage no longer exists. My hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire asked what we will do if we find that in fact the Reserve scheme is not working. If I understood him correctly—I think I did—he said that, by the time we discovered that we were not going to get the 30,000 Reservists, it would be too late to regenerate any of the loss in the 20,000 Regulars. [Interruption.] He seems to be indicating that I have understood him correctly. If that is the case, I take great exception to the fact that this linkage was ever made in the first place.
If we are to be told that we have to accept cuts in this country’s defence capability, we should be told that honestly. We should not constantly be confronted with shifting goalposts. If the recruitment of 30,000 Reservists may or may not be achieved, and if the 20,000 cut in Regulars will happen nevertheless and is irreversible, we should have been told that at the outset. [Interruption.] Somebody says, “We were.” Who said that?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 570 c1308
- Session
- 2013-14
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Conditions of employment Defence Contracts for services Defence equipment Procurement Reserve forces
- Legislation
- Defence Reform Bill 2013-14
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2018-02-07 16:56:58 +0000
- URI
- http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-11-20/13112092000453
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-11-20/13112092000453
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-11-20/13112092000453