HC Deb 24 January 2000 vol 343 cc17-8
12. Mr. Denis MacShane (Rotherham)

What progress he has made on the European strategic defence initiative; and if he will make a statement. [104546]

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)

We continue to make excellent progress on European defence.

At December's Helsinki European Council, European Union member states committed themselves to strengthening their military capabilities so that European nations will be better able to assemble, deploy rapidly and sustain effective forces for NATO or EU-led operations. EU member states also agreed to develop the military structures necessary for the EU to decide and, where NATO is not engaged, to act in response to crises. This work will be taken forward under the Portuguese presidency of the EU.

Mr. MacShane

Can the Secretary of State confirm that the European security and defence identity initiative was launched in Berlin and signed by the right hon. Member for Kensington and Chelsea (Mr. Portillo), a former Conservative Secretary of State for Defence? Is not the extent to which the Conservative party has moved hard to the right demonstrated by the fact that it is opposing an important initiative, which it launched, and which strengthens European and NATO identity and defence capability?

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that his opposite number, the hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith), travelled to the United States last year to attack Her Majesty's Government's settled policy on the armed forces in front of Congress? Is there another example in recent history of a shadow defence spokesman going to a foreign power to attack the settled defence policy of Her Majesty's Government and armed forces?

Mr. Hoon

I confirm the factual point about the results of the Berlin summit, where all NATO states signed up to the European security and defence initiative. As for my hon. Friend's further observations, it is a matter of regret that Opposition Front-Bench Members tend to resile from decisions that they previously accepted in government. It may be an indication of their growing anti-Europeanism. Indeed, the hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith) has a knee-jerk response to anything that contains the word "European."

Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)

Does not the Secretary of State's answer show the divorce between appearance and reality? The reality is that all the signatories, including the Government, are cutting defence expenditure, rather than increasing it to meet the grand objectives. Is not the whole scheme more about integration than any military objective?

Mr. Hoon

As I have said frequently—it is something that the hon. Gentleman needs to concentrate on—the policy is about improving European nations' ability to make an effective contribution to NATO, something to which his predecessors agreed and, indeed, signed up. Making the European contribution to NATO more effective will strengthen the ability not only of European nations but of NATO to conduct defence and security activities, of which he should be in favour.

Back to