What is the current strength of the Territorial Army. [96122]

On the basis of the most recently available data, the strength of the Territorial Army was some 45,000 on 1 September this year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman congratulate A company of the third battalion of The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment? In my constituency, it really took to heart what was said a year ago—that it should contribute to a "heavyweight role" rather than being simply "weekend warriors". It has 11 officers serving overseas, which includes Bosnia and Kosovo. It is, however, deeply disturbed by the lack of resources to train them. The resources and commitment that featured in the rhetoric simply have not been delivered in practice.

"to demonstrate that the smaller TA truly is better trained than in the past, and better suited for its role in supporting the regular Army."

I certainly congratulate the Territorial Army in the right hon. Lady's constituency, and I am confident that the proposals in the strategic defence review will contribute to its attempts to become part of an effective contribution to the regular armed forces. I have not had an opportunity to read the Select Committee report in any great detail, but I will do so and will give the right hon. Lady and the House a more detailed response in due course.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is dismay in Wales not only at the cut in numbers, but at the potential lowering of the quality of the TA's activities? Is he aware that earlier undertakings to maintain ancillary staff such as caretakers and others involved in the locations where they train have been reneged on, and that redundancies are now being made which make it difficult to keep the weaponry and stocks in those centres? Will the right hon. Gentleman now undertake to look at the figures, and to ensure that there is no reduction in quality, over and above the reduction in quantity?

I shall examine the figures and the concerns raised by the right hon. Gentleman, but let me make it clear that the whole point of restructuring the TA is to make it more relevant and more usable, and thus to enhance the quality of its contribution to our regular forces.

May I be the first to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman, from the Opposition Dispatch Box, on his recent appointment? We know that he must have one of the very best jobs in the Government.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his good wishes, although I am not so sure about the rest of his comments. I shall not repeat the points that I have already made about the basis of the SDR in relation to the TA, but I shall deal with the hon. Gentleman's point about compulsory mobilisation.

I thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for his kind remarks about the Chilwell mobilisation base in my constituency, whose opening I attended. Is he aware that enthusiasm for the new task is extremely high in the base, and that those to whom I have spoken are somewhat baffled by the Conservatives' idea that it is possible to have a reserve force that turns up or does not turn up when called on, according to individual whim?

I live close to the Chilwell base, and I know a number of people who work from there. It is my strong impression that those people welcome the changes that the Government promoted in the SDR, and want the TA to play an effective role alongside the regular forces.

If he will make a statement on the manning and recruitment targets for the armed forces. [96123]

Achievement of full manning is a key objective of the strategic defence review. The Navy expects to achieve full manning balance by April 2002, the Army by April 2005, and the RAF by April 2001. Recruiting across the three services is buoyant. The Royal Marines are having their best year since 1994, and all services report that they are on course to hit targets.

Following the SDR, we have had reductions in manpower and money for regular and reserve forces. The armed services are clearly suffering from overstretch, and the resulting pressures are causing many people to leave early. We now hear that the Government's magic solution is the recruitment of young offenders. Is it not a sad commentary on the Government and an indictment of their policy that they have to scour prisons for recruits for the next century?

I find it surprising that the Member of Parliament representing Poole did not welcome the good figures for the Royal Marines, which are positive news for his area. Current recruitment figures are the best for a decade. That is partly due to the excellent advertising campaign, the very good recruiting being undertaken on the ground, and the clear messages being given to a range of possible audiences about the attraction of a career in the armed forces. That should be welcomed.

My hon. Friend has talked about the general recruitment targets. He has also set some demanding targets for the recruitment of ethnic minorities. How are those targets being met? There are also demanding targets for the recruitment of women. What progress is being made on those targets?

We have set a target of a 1 per cent. increase per year in recruitment from the ethnic communities. That means 3 per cent. of total recruitment this year, 4 per cent. next year and 5 per cent. the year after. The Army looks to be on course to hit those targets. The other two services may not, but the Commission for Racial Equality is enormously enthusiastic about the success that we are having and encouraged by it. All the services have run ethnic recruitment operations around the country, including some run on a tri-service basis. The ethnic recruitment teams have shown enormous enthusiasm and have achieved a good deal of success with their target audience. We do not have a target figure for the recruitment of women, but it is pleasing that 13.2 per cent. of new recruits this year are women. That is an increase in the percentage, which means that we are drawing from a larger pool to get the best of our young people for our armed forces.

Is the Minister aware that figures supplied by the House of Commons Library show that in only two of the past eight years have the targets for Army recruitment been met? Is it not clear from those figures, for which the previous Government must take some responsibility, that the failure to recruit adequately is a factor in current overstretch? In those circumstances, is it not unimaginative to reject out of hand the proposal to recruit young offenders, as long as there is no compulsion; those selected demonstrate a genuine desire to lead a more constructive life; and there is careful screening and selection?

I agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman. It is unfortunate that some people have so cavalierly rejected an initiative that could give some youngsters who have taken a wrong turn in life an opportunity to make the right turn and become useful citizens who contribute to this country. The armed forces will implement all the safeguards that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has outlined. The scheme could give people a second chance and would be good for the country, good for the services and good for the individuals.

Will my hon. Friend send my congratulations, and those of many hon. Members, to the various recruiting departments for the innovation to which he has referred? He knows my involvement with young people, particularly in our cadet forces. What appalled me for many years was the reluctance to take on youngsters who had committed a misdemeanour in the past. Youngsters sometimes go astray because of their environment. Does my hon. Friend agree that the very structure to which those youngsters can now look forward will give them a second chance and will help them to take the path that we as a society would most welcome, rather than the alternative to which some appear willing to condemn them?

I welcome my hon. Friend's comments, and I want to stress the restrictions and careful safeguards in the exercise. Certain offences will not be ignored. The rules were changed a few years ago to enable people who had served a limited prison sentence to join the armed forces. These proposals, which have been worked out carefully with the Prison Service, would enable those concerned to take courses to show them what life in the services would be like after they have served their sentence. That is encouraging, and shows that the armed forces are taking an imaginative approach. At the same time, it offers a real opportunity to youngsters who may have had an unstructured life to get into the structured life of the armed services, to make something of themselves and to contribute to this country. The forces are warmly to be congratulated on their initiative in this respect.

Despite the Minister's bluster, the reality is that, since the Government came to power, the commitment of Her Majesty's forces is at a level unprecedented at any time since the second world war. Even on best estimates, the level of commitment will be significantly higher than that which the Government inherited. It is not just a matter of recruitment, but of retention of service personnel—between 900 and 1,100 men are leaving the Army alone every month. The situation has got so bad that the Government have had to produce a document for service families which says:

"We want to make it easier for them to keep in touch with their families, and give them more time together when they return."

The hon. Gentleman should tell the House and the nation which of those commitments he would not have undertaken. Would he pull our troops from the streets of Northern Ireland? Does he think that we should not have participated in the NATO operation in Kosovo? The Opposition's foreign affairs spokesman thinks that we should not have participated in East Timor, and that we should have left our friends and allies from Australia in the lurch. Those are our commitments. When we came into office, the level of commitment was 29 per cent., which increased to 47 per cent. at its peak. It is now back down to 35 per cent. We are taking measures in Kosovo and Bosnia to reduce that level, and we are implementing a welfare package. We get no answer from the Conservatives as to which commitments they would cut and which operations they think we should not have undertaken. Theirs is a facile view, and there is no joined-up thinking between the Opposition's foreign affairs and defence spokesmen.

What discussions he has had with his EU colleagues about improved co—operation in defence procurement. [96124]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and my noble Friend the Minister for Defence Procurement are in the process of meeting their European colleagues to take this important issue forward, both on a bilateral and on a multilateral basis.

Is the Minister aware that Europe spends about two thirds of what America spends on defence, but that European taxpayers gets less than 20 per cent. of American capability for their money? Does he agree with the Deputy Secretary of State of the United States, Strobe Talbott, who said recently in London that America wanted to see

"a strong, integrated, self-confident and militarily capable Europe"?

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. The Euro-sceptic rubbish exemplified by the letter from the Opposition defence spokesman is true to form for those who put their narrow sectarian interest ahead of the national interest. Along with five of our European partners, we have signed a letter of intent which will lead to the efficiencies in procurement across Europe which we all seek. That will contribute to our collective security in the continent as a whole.

The House will welcome the action that has already been taken by major British companies in restructuring Europe's defence industries. The restructuring has led to the emergence of more multinational companies to compete more effectively with the United States, although I hope that the Minister will confirm that that development in no way envisages a Fortress Europe, as the north Atlantic links are still very strong. However, what will the Government do about security of supply, which, with multinational companies, becomes much more important?

Those are clearly matters between the companies concerned. We look for mutual guarantees on security matters. However, I welcome the more constructive view expressed by the hon. Gentleman on the need for that type of restructuring, which was welcomed by Strobe Talbott in his speech of 7 October. I do not think that there is any danger of a division between the United States and Europe on those matters.

If he will make a statement on his policy in respect of representations concerning the holding of a public inquiry into the health, safety and environmental aspects of the work of the atomic weapons establishment at Aldermaston. [96125]

Aldermaston is a nuclear licensed site and is subject to independent and strict regulation by the nuclear installations inspectorate and by the Environment Agency. The regulators cover every aspect of the site's operations and procedures as they affect health, safety and the environment. They have power to enforce compliance and to close down operations if they believe such action is justified. They are publicly accountable and publish all information they believe to be significant.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that public fears and concerns have been exacerbated by the recent spate of incidents at AWE Aldermaston, including the unauthorised discharge of radioactive substances into watercourses; the impending prosecution by the Environment Agency; the descaling of the Pangbourne pipeline, resulting in the uncontrolled release of uranium and plutonium particles; and the recent well-publicised breaches of safety procedure? Does he accept that those understandable concerns and fears will be allayed only by a full, open and independent public inquiry, which is the policy of both West Berkshire council and Reading borough council, and was once, in 1994, the policy of the then Opposition?

I recognise that there is public concern. However, safe operation is of prime importance to the atomic weapons establishment. It is also at the forefront of the minds of the operating company, the Ministry of Defence and the nuclear installations inspectorate. Claims that, in the past year, the AWE has been at risk of major nuclear accident are simply untrue. It is also false to say that the AWE has been seeking to hide anything. The incidents in the articles to which my hon. Friend refers were taken from the AWE's own safety-related incident reports, which are released into the public domain as a matter of routine—in contrast to the somewhat hysterical attitude that has been displayed by certain newspapers.

My constituents are split between those who are worried about what is or may be going on at Aldermaston and those who are exasperated, as the Secretary of State said, by the way in which various scare stories are being hyped up by newspapers and others who should know better. Does the Secretary of State agree that both those groups of people would be helped by a full public and open inquiry so we know exactly what is going on and that, if the scare stories are untrue, they shall be seen as such at the earliest possible moment?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's concern, which is based on real public concern about the way in which those particular stories have been, as he says, hyped up in the newspapers. Nevertheless, I make it clear that the illustrations relied on, particularly by one Sunday newspaper, were ones that were routinely reported and allowed into the public domain. There is therefore nothing to hide, or to discover, which a public inquiry could reveal. It should be emphasised to local people, whether they work at the plant or not, that no present danger to the environment, the work force or the local population was found.

In the light of that, what assessment has the right hon. Gentleman personally made of the allegations about environmental contamination? On the strength of his inquiries, does he agree with the organisation that the claims thus far levelled against it are nothing more than irresponsible scaremongering?

I have examined each of the incidents that the newspaper alleged amounted to a real threat to the environment and local people. The accounts were based on reports that were to be released to the local liaison committee for discussion by people in the immediate area. Having read them carefully, I have not found any credible evidence of damage to the environment, to people who work in the plant or to the local community.

If he will make a statement on future commitments in Kosovo. [96126]

The United Kingdom remains committed to long-term peace and stability in Kosovo, and the Balkans as a whole. KFOR has now reached its intended strength of 50,000. British troops currently contribute a framework brigade headquarters and two battle groups, plus supporting elements—about 5,000 personnel in total, down from a peak of 10,500. We keep our force levels under constant review and do not keep troops in operational theatres longer than is absolutely necessary.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he accept that although we were right to send troops to Kosovo and East Timor, our current level of commitment is taking its toll on our forces and their families, and that we should do all that we can to reduce the burden on them?

I agree that we should aim to reduce our commitments where it is prudent to do so. I am aware of the demands placed on our armed forces and their families by the problems of overstretch. The recent withdrawals from Kosovo underline our commitment to minimise those problems, and I am pleased to tell the House that, following the recent restructuring of SFOR in Bosnia, about 900 of our service personnel will be home for Christmas. That also means that 900 personnel who were expecting to go to Bosnia will not now be deployed there.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there are about 14,000 unexploded cluster bombs lying on the ground in Kosovo, which are in effect aerially sown anti-personnel mines that maim and kill the innocent almost daily? As NATO dropped those bomblets, can NATO also play some part in clearing them?

NATO is playing a considerable part in clearing them. Indeed, United Kingdom troops have cleared more than 1,500 unexploded cluster bomb munitions from our sector—more than 80 per cent. of such unexploded ordnance in that area. KFOR as a whole has cleared more than 3,800 unexploded cluster bomb munitions, in addition to about 4,400 Serbian anti-personnel mines and 2,300 Serbian anti-tank mines.

Is it true that the Irish Guards is the only unit that does night patrols in Kosovo?

I do not know, but I shall find out and write to my hon. Friend.

It is true.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his good wishes. When I am stuck for further information I shall know where to come.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the reports that deny the atrocities that occurred in Kosovo? Will he take this opportunity to make it clear that there is enough evidence to show how justified the international community was in taking military action? Is he altogether satisfied that enough is being done to protect the lives of civilian Serbs, who can in no way be held responsible for the crimes and atrocities that occurred, from the thuggish element among the ethnic Albanians, which—however small it may be—is to a large extent the mirror image of its Serbian counterpart?

During one of my previous ministerial responsibilities, I happened to be the Foreign Office Minister on duty when details of atrocities discovered by British forces were first made known. There is no doubt from the evidence that it was necessary for NATO to launch Operation Allied Force to prevent what was undoubtedly an overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe, perpetrated by the forces of Slobodan Milosevic. As for the present security situation, I have had the opportunity of visiting Kosovo and I can tell the House that it is improving. While incidents of intimidation and murder continue to occur, they are declining, and the crime rate in Pristina is lower than in some western cities.

Is not the main lesson of the high continuing commitment in Kosovo and elsewhere that this is an unsuitable time for the Foreign Secretary to offer a blank cheque of further British troops to the United Nations?

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary did not offer the UN a blank cheque. The information to which the hon. Gentleman refers concerns forces that may be available to the UN in the event of their being requested. That is a standard procedure which has been in operation for many years.

As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has said, the crime rate in Kosovo is falling, but it is still high and includes ethnic killings. Will he give a commitment that western forces will act against such killings wherever they come across them? Many of the Kosovan Serbs who fled into Serbia have been treated badly there, and some will in due course wish to return to Kosovo. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that they will be welcomed back into Kosovo, which will become a better, more multi-ethnic place in the future?

I wish to make it clear that KFOR troops are providing robust and even-handed protection for everyone in Kosovo, regardless of their ethnic, religious or cultural background. On one of my visits to Kosovo I had the opportunity to meet representatives of the Serbian community. They made it clear that their people across the border in areas controlled by Milosevic were treated badly and were anxious to return. It is obviously the responsibility of the international community to provide a secure situation in Kosovo so that they can be encouraged to go back to their homes.

May I welcome the right hon. Gentleman to his post? I wish him the best of luck in what is arguably the best job in the Government. The UN document which was mentioned earlier contains a wish list of units and equipment on which it could call. It states that three aircraft capable of heavy lift would be available to the UN, but we have no such aircraft. The action in Kosovo proved the need for them. Will we rent them, or will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to make the decision that was postponed in the summer and order equipment that the armed forces want? I know that the Marines are due to go to Kosovo soon, but we also understand that as a result of the pressure on money—the Government are to cut a further…600 million in the coming Budget—the Marines will not take part in exercises in Norway, as is their usual custom.

I shall deal with all the various points made by the hon. Gentleman but first I thank him for his kind words. He and I debated European matters when we both first arrived in the House of Commons. I am sure that his views on Europe have remained the same, and that we shall debate them again in due course.

I welcome the news that many service personnel will return from Bosnia in time for Christmas with their families. However, will my right hon. Friend assure me that everything will be done to ensure that those accused of war crimes in Bosnia will still be brought to justice?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. There will be no let-up in the effort to track down those suspected of war crimes. In fact, British forces have been more successful than the forces of any other nation represented in Bosnia in bringing war criminals to justice. They have worked hard to ensure that none of those accused of war crimes escapes justice.

What changes against planned expenditure on defence procurement there have been this year. [96127]

I expect expenditure on defence systems procurement this financial year to be within the level reported in the Government's expenditure plans.

Given that an important part of the manufacturing base in Chelmsford relies on defence contracts, may I say how pleased I am that Alenia Marconi will benefit from the signing of the contract for the principal anti-aircraft missile contract. However, is the Minister confident that the smart procurement savings will be made? If not, is he prepared to make a commitment that the Government will make up from other sources the shortfall in funding for defence procurement?

I am absolutely confident that all the objectives associated with smart procurement will be reached. I am glad that the hon. Gentleman has drawn attention to that matter, as the initiative has proved extremely attractive, in our defence budget and across Europe. I am also pleased to tell him that it is likely that Chelmsford will benefit from the principal anti-air missile for future warships project to the extent of some…100 million of investment. I do not foresee any change in that, under present circumstances.

What progress is being made on the procurement decision for the beyond visible range anti-aircraft missile? Many companies and jobs depend on that decision. It is to be hoped that the British Aerospace Meteor programme—which is a pan-European missile—will be successful. If we do not get that, we will lose the relevant technology in this country.

It is true to say that all such projects depend on the effectiveness of the product, and on value for money. The competition is fair and open. We must assess each bid as it comes in for the projects under consideration.

I remind the Minister that the paragraph 96 of the strategic defence review identified an "urgent" need to improve our strategic transport. It suggested that the short-term solution was to acquire four McDonnell Douglas C-17 aircraft, or their equivalent. Is not that a grave deficiency that must be rectified at the earliest possible date? Was not the Secretary of State being disingenuous when he said that the short-term strategic transport aircraft requirement continued? I received a letter from Baroness Symons, the Minister for Defence Procurement, saying that the requirement had been terminated. No decision has been reached, but confusion continues.

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is confusing two different competitions. We fully intend to procure four aircraft in the short term, by one means or another, but we recognise that there are two separate issues. It may be argued that the long-term contract is even more important than the short-term. Responses have been received from Airbus Industrie, Boeing and Lockheed Martin. Each will be considered in due course.

If he will make a statement about his Department's measures to support recruitment through Air Training Corps. [96128]

The principal role of the Air Training Corps is as a national youth organisation. Its aims are to foster a spirit of adventure and develop qualities of leadership and good citizenship. It is, however, a valuable source of recruits and, with that in mind, RAF recruiting teams aim to visit every ATC squadron twice a year.

The Warwick and Leamington Spa squadron of the ATC, which I had the pleasure of visiting recently, does an excellent education and training job with young people as well as producing many enthusiastic recruits for our armed forces. However, for more than three years, the squadron has had to operate in temporary and shared accommodation. Will my hon. Friend look into the squadron's accommodation to see whether any assistance might be offered?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the interest that he has shown in the Warwick and Leamington Spa ATC. I agree that the accommodation is not ideal, although it is adequate. The lease on the building is due for renewal, which may allow a change in location, depending on the availability of suitable and affordable alternatives. I understand that there are hopes that the squadron may collocate with an Army Cadet Force unit in a new building. I shall ask my officials to liaise with my hon. Friend on developments.

As we are discussing service recruitment, may I put it to the Minister that when I did my basic training as a national service private soldier, some of the best chaps in my platoon were former borstal boys? One of them taught me how to get out of handcuffs, one of the few technological skills that I have ever acquired. Many young men get into trouble because they have never been connected with any organisation in which they could take pride. Nor have they ever had proper leadership. Many such chaps—though not, of course, all of them—would make first-class soldiers if they were carefully picked.

Given the hon. Gentleman's illustrious career in the City, I wonder whether those were golden handcuffs.

If he will make a statement on the progress of the Learning Forces Initiative. [96129]

The learning forces range of measures is giving armed forces personnel enhanced opportunities for self-development, linked to achievement of academic, vocational and professional qualifications. By fostering service people's lifelong learning, the initiative is preparing them for their eventual return to civilian life. Our learning forces programme forms an important aspect of our policy for people in the armed forces.

Although the initiative is very welcome, will my hon. Friend acknowledge that a substantial number of naval personnel are away at sea for extended periods? There is a need for more information technology and distance-learning facilities. My constituency has a substantial population of Navy personnel. Can the Minister assure me that the learning forces initiative will facilitate their needs?

I thank my hon. Friend for that question because he highlights the different circumstances that apply to different services. We recognise the special difficulties for lifelong learning imposed on the Navy by the necessity of service at sea. That is why enhanced information technology-based learning facilities are being trialled on HMS Invincible. Depending on that trial's success, we will look for further opportunities for IT-based learning on ships.

The Minister knows that I represent many serving and retired officers. Despite the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Sir P. Tapsell), several of them told me this weekend of their concern that the Government are concentrating in the strategic defence review on what they say are their policies for people, such as the learning forces initiative, to prevent the service people who have been leaving in droves in response to the Government's overstretch policies from leaving the services. It would be better to concentrate on looking after the men and officers already serving than to take desperate measures such as trying to recruit from the criminal classes.

Oh dear! Things have degenerated slightly. The hon. Gentleman is not only wrong about recruitment policy but underestimates the considerable advances that are being made on retention measures, whether through the service task force initiative, the work that we are doing with other Departments to improve the position of service families, the learning forces initiative or the work that we are undertaking so that our service men and women can have qualifications that are recognised externally so as to be portable to their future careers in the civilian world. If he talked not to the retired service men who may be putting that view but to active service men and women about the greater educational opportunities that already exist and the further developments that are taking place, he would have a different perspective.

What assessment he has made of the effects on armed forces discipline of the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights on homosexuals in Britain's armed forces. [96130]

My predecessor made it clear on 27 September this year that we accepted the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases brought by homosexual former members of the armed forces. We have set in hand an urgent review of policy in this area in the light of the judgment. I shall announce the outcome of that review as soon as possible.

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for that reply. However, given the deep and profound hostility among service men throughout the country to this ruling, and given that the Government argued vigorously at the European Court of Human Rights that to allow openly homosexual people to join the forces would be deeply damaging to their operational effectiveness, is it now his position that operational effectiveness will not be damaged, or is he prepared to accept that an Albanian, an Austrian and a Lithuanian judge are entitled to usurp the right of this House and our elected Government to determine the composition of the Her Majesty's armed forces?

I make it clear to the hon. Gentleman that this Government intend to uphold the law. In the light of the decision by the European Court of Human Rights, it is clear that we need a revised policy that sustains operational effectiveness and is within the law. Discipline is a key element in ensuring that we continue to have operationally effective forces. That is why we will underpin any new policy with a code of conduct that will operate across the three services and cover personal relationships and sexual behaviour generally.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement and the progress that the Government are now making. Does he agree that, as we near the end of the 20th century, homophobic bigotry has no place in Her Majesty's armed forces and that it should not determine the recruitment policies of the military?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his observations. I have made it clear that the Government—unlike, apparently, some Opposition Members—are determined to uphold the law, but that we will do so in a way consistent with the operational effectiveness of our armed forces.

The question relates to the impact of the judgment on the effectiveness of the armed forces. The European Court gave a split decision by seven judges, one of whom was so biased that he would have failed the Hoffman test and none of whom have served in the armed forces, but the Government tell us that they have no opinion as to the impact on the armed forces of the decision. When he was shadow spokesman on defence, the present Secretary of State for Scotland, the right hon. Member for Hamilton, North and Bellshill (Dr. Reid) said:

"Let me repeat that we in the Labour party have never given the green light to homosexual activity, conduct or relationships in the armed forces…We fully accept the particular conditions of the armed forces and that homosexual…relationships…can undermine and be prejudicial to good order and morale."—[Official Report, 4 May 1995; Vol. 259, c. 527.]

I am still unclear as to the position of Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen. I have made the Government's position absolutely clear: we will uphold the rule of law, and promote a policy that is consistent both with the rule of law and with operational effectiveness. It is important that Members on the Opposition Front Bench make it clear whether they are equally willing to uphold the law. I have discussed this matter with the Chief of the Defence Staff on several occasions; I am sure that I shall do so again before any final decisions are reached. However, as soon as those decisions are reached, I shall make a statement to the House.

What progress has been made towards reducing VAT on labour—intensive repairs to church buildings; and if he will make a statement. [96158]

What recent representations he has received concerning VAT on church repairs; and if he will make a statement. [96161]

I have received a number of representations on the matter, and the commissioners have joined the other central bodies of the Church of England in sending a detailed response to the Government's consultation document, issued by the Treasury in March this year. The Church is concerned that the consultation document repeats the view that European Commission regulations mean that the United Kingdom Government cannot consider introducing new VAT reliefs. As right hon. and hon. Members will be aware, the Church feels that there may be some scope for extending reduced VAT rates through an extension of items listed by the European Union Commission in annexe H to the sixth directive.

I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will he inform the House what progress has been made—especially in regard to my representations in the House and to representations from the other place? I understand that the hon. Gentleman might be minded to support the exemptions to which he referred. What support might we receive from the Paymaster General towards that end?

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her support for the campaign. The General Synod, meeting in York during the summer, debated a motion on the scope and rate of VAT as it affects the ministry of the Church. On a vote, the motion was carried without dissent. A similar view is held by those representing other faiths and secular charities. I hope to make a statement shortly as to how we might proceed with the campaign.

I fully support the hon. Gentleman if he feels able personally to mount a campaign to persuade the Government on this vexed question of VAT on repairs to Church buildings. Does he accept that, in essence, the problem is that, although the Government, with one hand, give certain grants on certain occasions to certain Churches, they take, with both hands, an axe called 17½ per cent. VAT on repairs? In support of his campaign, will he recognise that, in all equity, any relief on VAT for repairs to church buildings should cover all Churches—not only his own—and indeed the buildings of other established religious organisations?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for those questions. I shall be seeking a place in the ballot to obtain an Adjournment Debate on the subject. The many different faith traditions in the UK, which are represented by the Church's main committee, and many other charities should be grouped together in the campaign. I hope that the Church, through the Second Church Estates Commissioner, will be able to give leadership in the campaign and that it will be fruitful.

May I, uncharacteristically, echo the comments of the hon. Members for Vale of York (Miss McIntosh) and for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman)? My hon. Friend's answer will be disappointing to churchwardens in the Akeley South deanery in North-West Leicestershire, who attended a recent meeting led by the Bishop of Leicester at which the topic most often raised was the immense difficulty experienced by thousands of communities in rural areas in raising money to repair their beautiful buildings, most of which are listed, in addition to which…1 of every…7 they raise goes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Will my hon. Friend continue his campaign?

The campaign is in rather early days for my answer to have been disappointing. Since the beginning of time, Caesar—that is, the state—has received whatever he wants, and we are about to end the millennium rendering unto Caesar VAT that is too heavy and too unreformed.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the diocese of Oxford is a landowner in an area in my constituency where the economy is booming and land prices are high; and that the diocese has proposed that St. Barnabas church and its associated hall, which lie at the heart of their community in south Reading, should be torn down and bulldozed for profit? Will he give an assurance that such activities on the part of the diocese can be limited?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me prior notice of her question. I have read the Reading Chronicle so as to be able to answer it. The position of the Church Commissioners is that we have received no proposals from the diocese about that church; at this stage, it is entirely a matter for the Oxford diocese. The commissioners have a quasi-judicial role, which they might have to exercise in this case, so I am not able to take the matter further on the Floor of the House.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the resources available to determine the effectiveness of market testing by Government Departments. [96159]

The commission has to ensure that the National Audit Office has sufficient resources to carry out its work on a range of issues across all Government Departments and agencies. I am satisfied that that is the case at present, including, where appropriate, examinations of market testing by Government Departments. The NAO has conducted numerous detailed studies of market tests carried out by Government Departments and agencies, including services tested by means of public-private partnerships and the private finance initiative.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that answer. Has there been any recent comparative study of the individual performance of different Government Departments in respect of market testing? What criteria have informed that study or evaluation? Is he now satisfied that examples of expensive disservice and slovenliness have been rooted out in favour of good practice and maximum value for money for the British taxpayer?

The NAO carries out many studies and, as the hon. Gentleman knows, it is important that they cover the whole range of Government Departments. An essential element of the work is that comparisons are made and presented to the commission, which meets next month to consider those and other matters.

When the commissioners expect to make a statement on the proposal to allow experimental growing of genetically modified organisms on the agricultural land for which they are responsible. [96160]

The issue of whether commissioners' land should be leased to allow trials of genetically modified crops to take place is being considered initially by the Church's ethical investment working group, which develops a co-ordinated ethical investment policy for the Church.

Are any GM crops currently being grown on Church-owned land?

Currently, no GM crops are being grown on Church land. However, the commissioners have previously stated that, in respect of currently let tenanted farm land, it would be difficult in practice to stop our farmers from growing GM crops, should they want to do so. Like many farmers, ours have freedom of cropping and an attempt by the commissioners to prevent a tenant from growing GM crops might be challenged in the courts.

What is his policy relating to the conservation of wildlife on Church Commissioners' land. [96162]

The commissioners have an overall wildlife and conservation plan, which was drawn up by the farming and wildlife advisory group for each of their agricultural estates. The plans are adopted and implemented as appropriate.

I am glad to have that response. However, as the Church Commissioners examine investments ethically, will they move towards ensuring that all farming on Church land is environmentally friendly—that ties in with the previous question—and wildlife friendly? The Church Commissioners could thus—dare I say it—put their money where their mouth is and take a truly ethical stance by preserving the countryside.

The Church Commissioners take those matters seriously and consult their managers regularly. In view of their support for wildlife, we take environmentally friendly farming into account, but game shooting and foxhunting are matters for the agricultural and sporting tenants to determine.