Official Service Residences (Hansard, 6 February 1996)

§ 7. Mrs. Bridget Prentice
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much money has been spent by his Department on the official service residences in the past five years. [12033]

§ Mr. Soames
Over the past two years, £2.61 million and £1.51 million respectively has been spent on maintenance, building work, furniture and fittings of official service residences. I have today placed in the Library of the House my Department's detailed response to Sir Peter Cazalet's recommendations, which includes a reduced list of posts that carry an entitlement to an official service residence. The list shows that we have reduced such posts from 75 to 48, with further reductions to 44 as other posts lapse. I understand that Sir Peter is very satisfied by the way in which my Department has implemented his recommendations.

§ Mrs. Prentice
Given last year's scandal about expenditure on official service residences, including £33,000 for a set of curtains, does the Minister agree that 126 such a gross waste of taxpayers' money must stop or does he agree with the Daily Express that it makes the Secretary of State appear like a squalid little estate agent"?

§ Mr. Soames
No, I do not agree with the Daily Express. The hon. Lady has plainly not done her homework on the subject. In May 1995, the Government commissioned Sir Peter Cazalet, to whom we owe a great debt of gratitude for a very thorough piece of work, to report on representational entertainment in the armed forces. A copy of that report has been placed in the Library. Since then, and in the light of the Cazalet report, a great deal of work has been done and I am pleased to say that we have been able to implement Sir Peter's recommendations in full. I hope that the Labour party accepts that, in future, such matters will be managed more effectively and efficiently, and that, above all, there is no doubt that there is an important requirement for the services, which are a golden asset to this country, to entertain where they have a significant representational role.

§ Mr. Key
Will my hon. Friend confirm that our senior officers—when they are not living cheek-by-jowl with service men while winning wars or keeping the peace— are often occupying their first permanent home after a career of moving their wives and families around the world? Do they not occupy houses that represent the dignity of the rank that they hold for a short period? Is not that very necessary in the armed forces? It would be entirely inappropriate for the Prime Minister to live in Lewisham, for example, just as it would be inappropriate for senior officers not to live in official service residences.

§ Mr. Soames
My hon. Friend, through his constituency interest, is well aware of the importance of the representational role of very senior officers in all three services. We can now account for these matters more effectively, and I hope that we will be able to go forward from here.

§ Mr. Spellar
Is not the sale of Haymes Garth another example of the breathtaking incompetence of the MOD? When added to the sale of the married quarters estate, does not that comprise the giveaway of the century? Will the Minister confirm that the proceeds of the sales will go to the Treasury, but that future rents will come from the Defence budget? Is not that a defence cut by the back door?

§ Mr. Soames
That was as fine a display of soundbites as I have heard this year, and it displayed the politics of mediocrity and envy for which the Labour party is famous. Let us establish the facts—Haymes Garth is being sold and, very sadly, the officer who was previously concerned has left the service. The Cazalet report, which was commissioned by the Government, has been thoroughly examined and all of its recommendations carried out. The hon. Gentleman's question seems extraordinary in those circumstances.