HC Deb 29 April 2002 vol 384 cc652-4
2. Mr. Chris Bryant (Rhondda)

What steps he has taken to improve military communications since engaging in operations to combat global international terrorism. [50941]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Dr. Lewis Moonie)

A significant proportion of the funding made available for the immediate operational requirements needed in support of the campaign against international terrorism has been spent on military communications.

We have provided our forces with capabilities to improve interoperability with allies who are also engaged in the fight against international terrorism, and we have provided forces deployed to Afghanistan with the necessary communications assets to ensure maximum operational flexibility in a particularly demanding environment.

Mr. Bryant

I thank my hon. Friend for his answer. As he will know, many historians argue that during the second world war Britain's superior communications systems proved decisive in winning victory. Will he do everything in his power to ensure that British troops, many of whom are deployed 3,500 miles away in Afghanistan and many thousands of miles away in other places, still have that competitive edge?

Dr. Moonie

Looking in some detail at what we have done for troops in Afghanistan, we have improved our secure speech assets for deployed aircraft, improved our secure fixed communications links with allies, increased the number of tactical data links fitted to aircraft, undertaken improvements to our intelligence networks and expanded our operational level command information systems. We have procured additional lightweight tactical satellite systems, and 45 Commando now has several of those systems deployed in Afghanistan. We have also taken action to ensure that all those deployed in Afghanistan have the new personal role radio at their disposal.

Looking to the future, our ability to respond to urgent equipment requirements in support of specific operations is backed by a comprehensive programme of investment in military communications that will be progressively delivered over the next few years: Bowman, the new tactical communications system, in 2004; Skynet 5, the next generation of ground terminals, in 2005; and Falcon, the operational level communications infrastructure, in 2006.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

I welcome those improvements, but does the hon. Gentleman agree that however supportive one may be of European defence co-operation, especially within the ambit of NATO, it is important that strategic communications are not duplicated? What improvements are planned for NATO's strategic communications within the overall context of the fight against terrorism?

Dr. Moonie

I admire the hon. Gentleman's ingenuity in working that into a question on communications in Afghanistan. Communications requirements at the highest level in NATO are kept under constant review. Should any changes be planned, I am sure that he will be one of the first to be told.

Mr. Julian Brazier (Canterbury)

The shopping list of items that the Minister announced was extremely welcome, but will he confirm that even on his own schedule most of the British Army will be left with communications that are well behind those of many third world countries?

On the battle against terrorism, what steps are the MOD and its sister Departments taking to provide some form of intercommunication between our armed forces and the various civilian agencies that will be used in the event of terrorist attack in this country?

Dr. Moonie

If the previous Administration had worked a little faster on developing communications, we might have been in a better situation today. I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that interoperability with civilian capabilities and communications receives a high priority in our planning and will figure strongly in any future action that we take.