Army Strength (Hansard, 15 December 2003)

§ 12. Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell) (Con)
What targets he has set for personnel levels in the Army in each of the next five years. [143779]

§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Mr. Adam Ingram)
The current requirement for the Army is 106,730 personnel. The Department's target is to achieve manning balance by the end of 2005 and to maintain it thereafter.

§ Chris Grayling
I am grateful for that response. Can the Minister tell us whether any recruitment freezes are operating in the armed forces?

§ Mr. Ingram
Yes, I can. There are none.

§ Mr. Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab)
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the targets will be easier to achieve if we avoid the sort of false rumour that spread in the run-up to the White Paper's publication? Does he agree that such rumours about the future of the Army, especially our regiments, damage recruitment and morale?

§ Mr. Ingram
I could not agree more. Recruitment is proving difficult in some areas of the country. That is not because of lack of determination by Army recruiters or the recruitment teams in other parts of the armed forces. We are keen to build our strength in all areas. That is why I answered the earlier question about recruitment by saying that there was no freeze.
We are determined to build our strengths because we have to maintain our manning balance and the required strength that I outlined. My hon. Friend is right—every time someone mentions that a regiment is under threat, that could affect its recruitment. I ask hon. Members who wish to participate in the debate to bear that in mind. We are trying to maintain regiments' strengths, not undermine them.

§ Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West) (Con)
Does the Minister agree that the public would not understand how one could possibly afford to have fewer regular soldiers while regularly having to call up reservists?

§ Mr. Ingram
Is the hon. Gentleman looking for a compliment? I thought that he would have prefaced his question with "Sir" because I am used to being called that by members of our armed forces. It is a mark of respect, but I acknowledge that that is not forthcoming from him today.
As someone who recently returned from the Gulf, the hon. Gentleman is well aware of the quality of the work and effort that the Territorial Army and the reserves put 1312 in. I have probably met more reserves than any hon. Member, perhaps with the exception of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. I have spoken to them and seen them in theatre. I have been impressed by their integration into the overall effort and the way in which they play their specific role. We need the reserves and the TA, and we therefore want to encourage them and to ensure that recruitment continues. They are part of the same effort as the Regular Army. Its scale means that we have to call upon the reserves to a greater extent. They have been called up not only in Iraq but in previous conflicts, when they performed magnificently.

§ Mr. John Smith (Vale of Glamorgan) (Lab)
In the light of the Minister's reply and the statement by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, does the Minister anticipate a further broadening of the military footprint, especially as regards the Army? That would almost certainly help with recruitment and maintaining personnel targets. In the light of the highly successful relocation of the 1st Battalion the Welsh Guards to RAF St. Athan, will he shortly make an announcement on further units coming to that site?

§ Mr. Ingram
If my hon. Friend is not fighting for the future of the Defence Aviation Repair Agency, he is fighting for more of the British Army to be based at St. Athan.
If we consider the future of Northern Ireland and we reach a position whereby the numbers that are deployed there have to decline sharply, what will happen? Clearly, we have to develop an approach to the basing of troops, and the relevant issues are being considered. I cannot give the answer that my hon. Friend seeks today, but I am sure that he will continue to campaign fiercely for the basing of additional troops not only at St. Athan, but elsewhere in south Wales—perhaps even in north Wales, too.

§ Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con)
The whole House will wish to commiserate with the 3rd Battalion the Liberal Democrats, commanded by the hon. Member for Colchester (Bob Russell), who arrived just too late to ask his question. In military matters, that can be disastrous.
Last Thursday, in his statement to this House on the defence White Paper, the Secretary of State emphasised the need for change and the opportunities that are offered to increase capability through technology. Several hon. Members—and, in another place, Lords Inge, Guthrie and Boyce—mentioned the importance of our forces personnel both in the war against terrorism and in peace support operations, graphically described by Lord Inge as "boots on the ground". As hon. Members know, the reality is that the Army is short of 4,700 personnel. No amount of spin, fiddled figures or warm words will alter that fact. How will the Minister man today's commitments, let alone those of the defence White Paper? Will he cut regiments and the overall size of the Army to fit the available manpower?

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ Mr. Ingram
I was expecting the hon. Gentleman to go on a bit, so that he would be ruled out of order, as the hon. Member for New Forest, East (Dr. Lewis) was. 1313 The question of "boots on the ground", as the hon. Gentleman and Lord Inge put it, is mentioned in the White Paper and is clearly understood. As I said, we plan to continue to grow to meet the figure of 106,730 personnel: that is what we are seeking to achieve. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman heard my comments about people who are speculating, thereby perhaps creating unrest and affecting morale unnecessarily. The armed forces will not be used as a political football by Labour Members, because that diminishes those who do it.