Skip to main content

Territorial Army

Volume 203: debated on Tuesday 4 February 1992

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

10.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received about the future strength of the Territorial Army in Scotland.

Can the Minister confirm that they included representations to ensure that any rundown in the Territorial Army in Scotland will not mean there being insufficient units in Scotland, to the point at which the TA will lose the goodwill of the scattered communities, particularly in the highlands and islands, in terms of recruitment? Did he also receive representations about 15 Parachute regiment to the effect that it should be allowed to continue at its five locations in Scotland? Will he take this opportunity to confirm that sufficient resources will be made available to ensure that full establishment is maintained at each of those locations for men and resources, for training and administration?

I am always fascinated to hear Liberals going on about resources being made available for defence, when they are committed to cutting them by 50 per cent. by the end of the century. I am never sure how their inquiries fit in with that commitment.

The reduction in Scotland will be 13 per cent. compared with a United Kingdom average of 17 per cent. So Scotland is being treated well under the measures.

The geographical spread will be very much a question of how the highland and lowland TAVRAs—the Territorial Army volunteer reserve associations—decide to allocate their resources. My hon. Friend has made it clear that no willing volunteer will be turned away and that anybody who wants to continue to serve with the TA will be able to do so, maybe not with the unit in which he is now serving, but with another unit.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Scotland's contribution to the armed forces, including the TA, far exceeds its proportion of less than 9 per cent. of the United Kingdom population? That has been recognised by the Government. That is why Scots who are interested in military and other matters will always be best served by a Conservative Government.

That is absolutely right. It is amazing what we hear from Opposition Members, when they intend to cut defence expenditure. The effect that that would have on Scottish defence would be devastating in terms of procurement and the employment of people in the armed forces.

Is it not a fact that on 3 July last year the Minister of State told my hon. Friend the Member for East Lothian (Mr. Home Robertson) that the recruitment figures for individual battalions in Scotland would not be released on the ground of security, yet when it suited the Secretary of State's purpose, he was prepared to release figures showing 67 per cent. recruitment to 15 Parachute regiment? Can he therefore confirm that either the Secretary of State has breached the security rules or that the excuse of national security has been used merely to cover the fact that the Government made the decisions on political rather than on military grounds? Is that not why there is so much concern in Scotland among supporters of the regiment? Is he aware that there will be a wide welcome for my assurance that an incoming Labour Government will review each and every one of these decisions to ensure that the size and structure of the regiments in Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom reflect our military needs, and not the political expediency of the Tory party?

If the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that a review of defence by an incoming Labour Government, should we happen to have such an Administration, would mean more money being spent on defence, I am a Dutchman.