§ 4. Mr. LitherlandTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his latest assessment of the effects of demographic changes upon Her Majesty's Government's defence policy.
§ 7. Mr. Nigel GriffithsTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his latest assessment of the effects of demographic changes upon Her Majesty's Government's defence policy.
§ Mr. NeubertDemographic changes pose a particular challenge which we are taking steps to address for the recruitment and retention of manpower, but they do not require changes in current defence policies and commitments.
§ Mr. LitherlandWhy do the Government have a negative attitude towards the conventional forces in Europe talks in Vienna when we could be discussing the reductions in troop levels? Does he agree that the Government's record in the planning of reductions in the 1990s has been pathetic and short sighted and that it will be very costly for the taxpayer?
§ Mr. NeubertThe premise of the hon. Gentleman's question is wrong. We played a full part in the events that led to the conventional forces in Europe talks in Vienna and we shall continue to do so. We lack no vigour or enthusiasm for those developments. However, when it comes to defending our country against potential threat, we must maintain our forces at assessed levels. We are endeavouring to do that through a range of initiatives which were put under way long ago—not as recently as the hon. Gentleman first discovered the problem.
§ Mr. GriffithsDoes the Minister realise that inadequate living conditions are driving people out of the armed forces and that a quarter of armed forces accommodation is of the lowest grade, grade 4? What is the Minister doing to improve the quality of accommodation so that it meets demographic changes?
§ Mr. NeubertThe hon. Gentleman has a point, and we recognise it. There is—[Interruption.] If hon. Members will be good enough to wait for the answer—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. Win GriffithsThe Minister thinks he is Sergeant Bilko.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The Minister must have a chance to answer.
§ Mr. NeubertIf I were Sergeant Bilko, I would call the hon. Gentleman to attention.
If Opposition Members were to await the answer, they would know that, over the passage of 10 years, that property, like any other property, deteriorates. We have a major programme of works to accommodate that. The existence of a substantial number of lower-graded dwellings is perhaps of convenience and acceptability to those who occupy them, because they pay low rents.
§ Mr. Ian BruceDoes my hon. Friend agree that one of the main reasons why we lose members of the armed forces is that highly skilled personnel are asked to do such things as security duties and ship deep-cleaning? Does he agree that we should continue to ensure that those tasks are civilianised and that security is kept at a high level without having to use highly trained people?
§ Mr. NeubertYes. There are many component parts in the well-being of members of Her Majesty's armed forces. My hon. Friend has pointed to another need, which is to avoid stretch and over-stretch and, wherever possible, to accommodate civilian manpower in operationally administrative roles so that serving men and women can be released to do their proper jobs.
§ Sir Dudley SmithIs my hon. Friend aware that, even with the best will in the world and provided that it keeps its bargain, the Soviet Union will take six to eight years or even longer to reduce its conventional forces? Is he further aware that, in respect of NATO, we start from a much lower base, which also includes troops? In those circumstances, does he agree that there is a danger of a serious imbalance occurring unless we watch matters very carefully?
§ Mr. NeubertMy hon. Friend observes with a rather more expert eye the scene in eastern Europe and beyond. It is quite clear that we shall have a continuing need for manpower and womanpower in the armed services, and we are doing all that we can to maintain assessed levels of need.