The Gulf (Hansard, 19 March 1991)

§ 10. Mr. Terry Fields
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will enumerate the financial costs of deployment of British armed forces in the Gulf up to the end of the Gulf war.

§ Mr. Tom King
As so far assessed, the additional costs of the Gulf conflict are about £1.75 billion. The eventual costs will be significantly higher—possibly up to £3 billion, spread over several years. I am discussing the provision for those additional costs which fall in 1991–92 with my right hon. and learned Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Implications for defence spending from 1992–93 will be considered in the normal way later this year.

§ Mr. Fields
The figures show the Secretary of State's obvious influence in Cabinet when arguing for such sums of money to remove the obscenity of Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. Will he now use that same influence to remove from British society the obscenities of homelessness, poverty and hospital waiting lists and to enable pensioners and others on income support not to have to pay the poll tax—or are those simply areas of collateral damage and thus insignificant?

§ Mr. King
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, at least for the first part of his question. It was the first time that I have heard him pay tribute to the work of our forces or recognise the need for us to take the action that we did for the liberation of Kuwait. The other issues obviously go a little wide of the question.

§ Mr. Tim Smith
What progress has my right hon. Friend made in obtaining contributions from overseas towards the cost of the war?

§ Mr. King
My right hon. and learned Friend the Chief Secretary has been the most active in that area. We have received significant contributions, amounting to in excess of £1.25 billion, and we hope for further contributions from our allies who very much appreciate our contribution to the liberation of Kuwait and the costs involved.

§ Mr. Tony Banks
We could have saved even more money by not fighting the war at all. One of the best ways of guaranteeing that we do not get into such wars is to ensure that unpleasant people such as Saddam Hussein are not given arms by western nations. For future reference, will the Secretary of State tell us what support he is giving to President Bush, who said that there will be a moratorium on arms exports to the middle east? Will he give an assurance in the House that we shall not, under any circumstances, authorise any arms exports to anyone in the middle east from now on?

§ Mr. King
That is a particularly silly supplementary question—but well above the hon. Gentleman's usual standard. He knows perfectly well—he has been told this on a number of occasions—that we have strict licensing requirements for the export of arms. He knows perfectly well that we have not sold arms to Iraq for a number of years, for precisely the reason that he has in mind. He also knows perfectly well that some of the arms that we have sold, especially to Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman and the United Arab Emirates, helped in the campaign to liberate Kuwait.