§ 3. Mr. Eric ClarkeTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the problems of overstretch in the armed forces. [4311]
§ Mr. SoamesThe services continue to be very busy but are well able to meet their current operational commitments.
§ Mr. ClarkeDoes the Minister agree that it is gross Government incompetence to cut the armed forces by one third and make our troops overstretched? Can he explain that total incompetence?
§ Mr. SoamesThe hon. Gentleman has been ill briefed and ill served by his hon. Friends in asking so gauchely a question that has an important root—the nature and length of the commitments of our armed forces. As I have said, they are very busy—very pushed. We must be mindful of what we ask them to do. They are highly motivated, their morale is high and they are superbly equipped. Questions such as that make a fallacy of the truth.
§ Mr. KeyNotwithstanding the superb performance of our forces in their peacekeeping role, will my hon. Friend always ensure that the country realises that our service men and women are recruited for a fighting and combative role above all?
§ Mr. SoamesI am grateful to my hon. Friend. He may be assured that no one in the Ministry of Defence—including my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, my hon. Friends the Minister of State for Defence Procurement and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State—or in any of the training arms of the armed forces is under any delusion in that regard. They know that all our troops must continue to be trained to fight the high-intensity battle and to be able to cope with the most demanding combat conditions as well as some of the new missions, which, as the hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Clarke) meant to say, are indeed imposing some strain on the armed forces. Whatever they are asked to do, they acquit themselves superbly.
§ Dr. David ClarkThe Government have allowed a situation to develop where the Army has a shortfall of more than 5,000 recruits. Why?
§ Mr. SoamesThe Army is, indeed, approximately 5,000 men under strength. At each Defence Question Time the hon. Gentleman asks the same question in a more gauche and foolish way. On each occasion he comes back with a more stupid question.
The reasons for the shortfall, particularly in the infantry, are plain. We cannot compel people to join the infantry. It is interesting that the technical arms—the sappers, the electrical and mechanical engineers, the signallers—are almost fully recruited. It is clear that we will have difficulty persuading people to join the infantry. Not everyone wants to be battle-fit 365 days of the year. We have a great deal to do. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be gratified to hear that enlistments are on the up and recruiting has increased by more than 35 per cent. compared with this time last year.
§ Dr. Goodson-WickesI am confident that my hon. Friend will welcome signs that recruitment shortfalls in the Army are levelling out. However, the Government's admirable policies will mean that unemployment will fall lower, which will make recruitment increasingly difficult. In that context, will my hon. Friend give the House an assurance that a decision in principle has been made in his Department to reintroduce the admirable concept of junior leaders? Will he press his Treasury colleagues to ensure that that scheme can be put into action? Perhaps we shall hear an indication this afternoon.
§ Mr. SoamesMy hon. Friend is right that the junior leaders provided extraordinary technical and military leadership throughout all ranks and sections of the Army. My right hon. Friend and I are studying the scheme closely. We intend to consider whether to establish a pilot scheme of some sort, but clearly such matters must take their place in the priorities of ensuring that our people have the equipment they need to undertake the tasks that face them. I do not dissent from anything that my hon. Friend has said, and his support is extremely welcome.