I regret to have to report to the House the death of the right hon. Robin Cook, the Member for Livingston. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House will join me in mourning the loss of a colleague and in extending our sympathy to the right hon. Member's family and friends.

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement about changes to the business of the House for this week. Before doing so, I should like to pay tribute to former distinguished Members of the House and Government who died during the summer recess.

It is perhaps fitting that I should pay particular tribute to a former Leader of the House, Robin Cook. I assume that he would have regarded his time as Foreign Secretary as the pinnacle of his ministerial career, but history will certainly remember him as a modernising Leader of the House of Commons, who carried through wide-ranging reforms to the way in which we go about our parliamentary business.

Mo Mowlam was held in great affection both here in the House and throughout the country, above all because of her simple and straightforward honesty in dealing with the people whom she met, whether the President of the United States or the chef whom she went out of her way to thank during a visit organised by the Ministry of Defence.

The business for Thursday 13 October will now be a motion to approve the Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2005, followed by a debate on combating benefit fraud on a motion for the Adjournment of the House. I can also announce that the Opposition day debates on Wednesday 12 October will relate to the regionalisation of emergency services and to climate change.

I join the Leader of the House in paying tribute to both Mo Mowlam and Robin Cook. I remember arriving as a young, new Member five years ago when Robin Cook was one of the towering giants on the Government Benches. He was a distinguished holder of the office of Leader of the House. I think that even the present Leader of the House would admit that he would be a hard act for any future one to follow. He will be much missed in the House. Mo Mowlam, a distinguished figure for many years who made a major contribution to the Government, will also be missed by people on both sides of the House.

I am grateful to the Leader of the House for the update on the business. Thursday's business relates to terrorism issues. It is only a statutory instrument and, given all the press reports in the last few weeks, we are clearly waiting for the full set of proposals from the Government, so can he give us any indication as to when we can expect those?

Soon.

I join in the tributes paid to Mo Mowlam and Robin Cook, both of whom not only made enormously distinguished contributions to the work of the House and to Government, but also established firm personal friendships with Members on both sides of the House and maintained great respect throughout their time in the House and beyond.

Will the Leader of the House confirm that, on Thursday, we will debate a single order, dealing with, I think, 15 different organisations, that is incapable of amendment? Will he reflect on the fact that that does not allow for proper and separate consideration of the different organisations involved on their merits, which might be appropriate in this case? I thank him for the fact that the order and the explanatory memorandum are now available in the Vote Office and for the clear notes that are provided explaining the significance of each of the organisations mentioned.

Given that the notes indicate that, as far as we are aware, many of the organisations have no actual membership within the United Kingdom, and therefore we are largely dealing with association or perhaps financial movements, will any subsequent orders be required under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002? Would it not be appropriate to bring those forward at an early stage, given that, if the Home Secretary feels that there is a proper threat, it is right that the House should consider them at the earliest opportunity?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making it clear that the draft order is available in the Vote Office, which allows hon. Members to see the details for themselves. At this stage, I do not want to be drawn into a debate about the draft order's contents and I am sure that hon. Members will take full advantage of the normal arrangements for debating a statutory instrument, when they have the opportunity to do so.

My right hon. Friend will recall that a two-week September sitting to put an end to the nonsense of the 80-day summer recess was one of the wide-ranging reforms introduced by our late colleague, Robin Cook. Now that the nice new screen has been fitted, will he assure the House that the September sittings agreed by Robin Cook will continue in the next parliamentary year?

My right hon. Friend has been assiduous in asking that question—it was the last question he asked before the recess, so it is entirely appropriate that it is the first thereafter. I am relieved to see the screen in place, because my reply to his earlier question made it clear that the length of this year's summer recess was due to its fitting. It is important that we discuss and debate the parliamentary timetable, which the Modernisation Committee will do on Wednesday.

In endorsing the Leader of the House's gracious tributes to departed colleagues, may I say that Robin Cook, whom I was privileged to know, was an outstanding parliamentarian whose presence enriched this House, which has been greatly impoverished by his passing? Given that anti-terrorism legislation is of the highest importance in establishing the balance between security and freedom, and that it is desirable to try to command as much consensus as possible between the parties, does the Leader of the House accept that it makes a great deal of sense to debate all stages of the Bill on the Floor of the House?

That question does not strictly concern this week's business, but I shall answer it in the spirit in which it was asked. I am sure that the usual channels will consider the hon. Gentleman's point in due course.

May we have an opportunity for an urgent discussion this week on the recent European Court of Justice case that increases criminal law jurisdiction by the European Union against the wishes of the Government, whom I support on that issue?

Order. The statement is very restricted, and the right hon. Gentleman is discussing the business of the House.

We will debate issues relating to terrorism on Thursday. The Leader of the House knows that incidents about which hon. Members may want to ask questions have occurred in this country during the 81 days that we have been off. Will he reflect on opportunities for hon. Members to table written questions during the recess?

As I have said, the Modernisation Committee will consider a paper on the organisation of the parliamentary year and I take the hon. Gentleman's suggestion as a contribution to that discussion.

Further to the question asked by the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin), the Leader of the House will recall the final business statement in July, when, in response to my question, he agreed to a fresh debate and a fresh vote on whether to sit in September. I assume that that promise still stands.

I certainly recall offering a debate, but I cannot recall offering a vote.

With permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall make a statement about our operations in Iraq.

On returning to the House, may I first express my sincere condolences—and, I am sure, those of the whole House—to the families of those UK forces personnel who were most recently killed in Iraq: on 5 September, Fusilier Donal Anthony Mead and Fusilier Stephen Robert Manning, both from C company, 2nd Battalion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers; and on 11 September, Major Matthew Bacon of the intelligence corps, who was serving as a staff officer with the headquarters of the Multi-National Division (South-East). We express our gratitude to those who gave their lives in the service of their country, and we express our condolences to their families and to their loved ones.

Let us remind ourselves of our objective in Iraq. It is to work, along with the rest of the international community, and now the United Nations under United Nations Security Council resolution 1546, to assist the Iraqi people and their elected representatives: first, to establish their own democratic Government and institutions; secondly, to build their own security forces to safeguard that democracy; and thirdly, to develop their economy and civil society. We are helping the Iraqis to build all three of them; the terrorists want to impede and destroy all three of them. That is the battleground. I can put it no better than President Talibani did in The Times this morning:

"The battle of Iraq cannot be won by retreat or compromise, but by the vision and determination for which Britain is renowned."

And that means, as Prime Minister Jafaari said when I met him recently:

"The presence of multinational forces in Iraq for us is based on need, security need for those forces to support our forces."

The United Kingdom is in Iraq for as long as we are needed, and as long as we need to be there, and no longer than either.

The political process, despite the worst intentions of the terrorists, continues to be on track. Following the elections in January of this year and the establishment of the constitutional commission, the Iraqis have now produced a draft constitution that will be the subject of an historic national referendum later this week. Few people thought that we would get to this point. Preparations are also under way for full, democratic, national elections in December. These are, in any context, enormous strides forward, and, in the context of the continual terrorist activity, hugely significant strides forward which have been made in spite of the terrorist attempts to derail Iraq's progress towards a peaceful and democratic future.

Against this political backdrop, the coalition's top priority is working with the Iraqis to improve the security environment and to build the capability of the Iraqi security forces so that they themselves are increasingly able to take responsibility for delivering law and order. In this we are working not alone, but with 27 other nations under the United Nations Security Council resolution. Despite, again, all the efforts of the terrorists, I can report to the House that we are beginning to see real progress in building up the Iraqi security forces. There are now more than 190,000 Iraqi security force personnel who have been trained and are capable thus far, and the number of Iraqi units capable of conducting effective counter-insurgency operations is increasing steadily. That means that there are now, for the first time, more trained and capable Iraqi security forces than there are multinational forces in Iraq.

But as everyone involved in this process recognises, there are no quick fixes, and building the Iraqi leadership, command and control, logistics and support structures will take more time. We have always said that our handover to the Iraqis themselves will be conditional upon their developing their own security capabilities, and that we will see the job through until those conditions have been met.

The House may wish to be reminded of the criteria and the terms on which those conditions might be fulfilled, since there has been some demand outside this House for clarification on what is sometimes called the exit strategy. The conditions that will permit the transfer of security responsibility to the Iraqi security forces have been defined by the joint committee to transfer security responsibility, which, as the House may recall, was formed by the Iraqi Prime Minister over the summer.

The basic principles for transfer of security to the Iraqi authorities are based on four broad categories: an assessment of the insurgents' threat level; Iraqi security forces' ability to take on the security task themselves; the capacity of provincial bodies to cope with the changed security environment; and the posture and support available from coalition forces. Those are the criteria; we expect the committee's criteria to be confirmed soon. Thereafter, assessments will be made by the Iraqis to determine which areas of Iraq are ready to transfer to Iraqi control.

I emphasise that we therefore stand by the strategy that we have maintained up to now, which sets out the conditions under which we will hand security to the Iraqis themselves and begin to draw down our forces. I want to emphasise again that we will stay in Iraq until the job is done and that we will not make significant changes to the United Kingdom's force posture in Iraq until we, the coalition partners and, in particular, the Iraqis themselves, are confident that the conditions are right. That was, is and remains our position and any speculation to the contrary is simply wrong. Indeed, I would go further and say that the biggest obstacle now to our leaving Iraq in view of the build-up of the Iraqi forces' capability is the actions of the terrorists themselves. Terrorist activity only delays our leaving Iraq; it does not hasten it.

Turning specifically to the security situation in Multi-National Division (South-East), hon. Members will have seen the graphic television pictures of events in Basra on 19 September. Two soldiers in MND(SE) were arrested by the Iraqi police service and held at an Iraqi police station in Basra. We agreed with the Governor of Basra and the chief of police to collect the personnel from the police station but, as we prepared to do so, it became clear that the two soldiers had been handed to local militia. The decision to mount an operation to enter the police station was then taken—a decision that I fully supported at the time and still fully support.

I am pleased to be able to tell the House that, while one of the soldiers injured on that day is still receiving medical treatment, the others have returned to their units. They all have my thanks and admiration for a job well done, and I believe that they have the thanks of the whole House.

The fact that we were able to mount an extremely complex operation in defence of our own soldiers, which led to the successful rescue of two soldiers held hostage by militiamen without firing a single shot, is a credit to our forces. I can also confirm that the Iraqis have now withdrawn the warrants that they issued later that week for the arrest of the two British soldiers concerned.

I would not wish to downplay the challenges that remain before us. For instance, the arrest of 12 suspects last week on Friday demonstrates our determination to deal robustly with those implicated in improvised explosive device attacks—bomb attacks to the layman—against our UK forces. I can confirm that weapons and other equipment were found in those raids.

Nevertheless, serious as they were, we need to keep those events in perspective. The rest of MND(SE) was unaffected, Basra has remained largely calm since the incident and we have been working hard to restore relations with Basra council so that we can work together for the good of the people in Basra.

On troop roulement and troop presence in Iraq, I very much regret the speculative and often wildly misleading press reports that have appeared since we last met here. I have not discussed any troop roulements in detail until the House returned because I believe that the House should be the first to know our intentions. Unfortunately, holding for that length of time sometimes prompts wild speculation outside.

Let me therefore turn to the details of the next routine troop rotation of UK forces in MND(SE), which begins this month. The lead UK formation in Iraq, currently 12 Mechanised Brigade, will be replaced by 7 Armoured Brigade, which will take over command of UK forces in early November. In addition to 7 Armoured Brigade's Headquarters and Signals Squadron, the following major units will be deployed to replace those currently in Iraq: 2nd Battalion the Parachute Regiment; 1st Battalion the Highlanders; 1st Battalion the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers; 9th/12th Royal Lancers; 1st Battalion the King's Own Royal Border Regiment; the Scots Dragoon Guards; 3rd Regiment Royal Horse Artillery; 32nd Engineer Regiment; and 2 Logistics Support Regiment.

The Territorial Army units involved in this roulement are a single company from the 4th Battalion the Parachute Regiment and a composite company from the West Midlands Regiment and the Royal Welsh Regiment. During what will be a very busy period of troop movements, I have also decided to deploy one company from the Cyprus-based theatre reserve force to relieve the rotating troops of some routine security tasks, such as static security or guard duty. A company of 1st Battalion the Royal Highland Fusiliers will deploy for a few weeks while that rotation lasts.

The total numbers of troops in Iraq following the deployment of 7 Armoured Brigade will be around 8,000. That is about 500 fewer than at present, reflecting the closure of two small bases in Basra, the transfer of some training tasks to the Iraqi security forces and structural differences between the two brigades. These are relatively minor adjustments, however, and will not affect the activities being carried out by United Kingdom forces.

We will continue to build Iraqi security capability and to keep the security situation under review during the referendum and through the elections later this year. The Iraqi security forces themselves will lead on security in the referendum, with our support. In MND(SE), we have been assisting the Iraqi army's 10th Division to ensure that it is prepared for this task. Earlier this year, I visited the 10th Division in Iraq.

This summer has seen much positive progress in Iraq, despite the worst intentions of the terrorists. The production of an Iraqi constitution, written by democratically elected Iraqi politicians on behalf of their own people, is a huge step forward. We have no intention of undermining this historic achievement by abandoning Iraq before it is ready to stand on its own two feet, or before its democratically elected politicians feel that to be the case. Of course, we will encounter more obstacles. There will be more major hurdles to overcome, particularly in the run-up to the elections in December, when a minority of the Iraqis and some from outside—the terrorists—will almost certainly seek to disrupt Iraq's progress towards security, democracy and self-determination.

The recent discovery and recovery of more than 160 more bodies from a mass grave in the al-Muthanna province in MND(SE) is a sober reminder of the horrors that the Iraqi people have had to face in the past, and of the reasons why we must continue our efforts to support them in building a better future, embracing democracy and free from tyranny. So, while we do not want to be in Iraq any longer than is absolutely necessary, we will not be deflected from our task. We have made a commitment to the Iraqi people; it is important that we honour that commitment and see our task through, and that is what we will do.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and for giving me advance sight of it. On behalf of my colleagues, I join him in sending condolences to the families of those who have so bravely but tragically lost their lives. I also join him in paying tribute to our armed forces serving in Iraq. In the face of severe dangers, their courage, commitment, professionalism and loyalty are a matter of great pride and an example to us all.

For all the Secretary of State's brave words, however, the situation in Iraq today is grim. There are now about 500 insurgent attacks each week, fuelled by growing outside interference, not least in MND(SE). The price is indeed being paid for the crass decision to disband the Iraqi security forces after the war—a decision that gave the insurgents their opening.

Today, the Secretary of State has again reiterated that we should stay in Iraq, in his words, until our job is done. I agree, but the critical question is how he defines the job and who makes that crucial assessment. According to the Secretary of State it is the Iraqi Government. Of course, they have an absolute right to ask us to go if they wish us to do so, but surely their right to ask us to stay cannot be open-ended. Ultimately, is not it for us and no one else to decide on the deployment of our armed forces and when they should begin to draw down?

I have noted what the Secretary of State said about troop rotations. I listened with surprise at the pride with which he mentioned the names of some of those regiments—ironic in light of the fact that at the same time he is trying to abolish so many of those same regiments. The 1st Battalion the Royal Highland Fusiliers is to be deployed for the third time. I might ask him has its rifle company, which was stranded in Jordan for lack of air transport, been recovered? He has confirmed that a date has been set for the withdrawal of 12 Mechanised Brigade, but for how long will there be an overlap between the reserve battalion coming in and the brigade before that withdrawal takes place?

The House also noted what the Secretary of State had to say about the developing capability of the Iraqi security forces. I must press him a little on that. He tells us that 190,000 personnel have been trained so far and that the number of capable units is increasing steadily. However, is not it the case that, as the top United States commander in Iraq, General Casey, told the Senate last week, only one Iraqi army battalion seems fully capable of fighting independently and is not that two fewer than was the case only two months ago?

In MND(SE), with the apparent serious level of infiltration of the security forces by Iranian-backed insurgents, something on which the right hon. Gentleman has had little to say so far today—I hope he will say more—how confident is he that those forces will be able to take over in the short to medium term? Indeed, what estimate has he made of such infiltration? Does he now accept, for instance, that many of the latest roadside bombs are of Iranian design and manufacture? I understand that, as a result of the increased attrition from roadside bombing, our forces in MND(SE) are relying heavily on the use of helicopters. Are there enough helicopters to meet those new requirements and how many of them are having to be commercially contracted?

Finally, will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to say whether there is any truth in the rumour that coalition representatives are seeking to open channels of communication with at least some of the insurgents?

The whole House and the nation are proud of our armed forces. I, too, pay tribute to Brigadier John Lorimer, commander of 12 Mechanised Brigade and his troops for their remarkable action in rescuing the two captured soldiers two weeks ago. Our forces throughout have carried out their tasks with all the fortitude and courage we would expect from our British Army, and our thoughts are with them all in the task that lies ahead.

I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for his words of support and his plaudits for our forces. They are well deserved and his views are reflected on both sides of the House. The right hon. and learned Gentleman asked how the job being done would be measured and by whom. I hope that in the four criteria that I outlined in my statement I have set out the how part of that—in other words, the criteria by which we shall judge the job being done. The capacity of the Iraqi security forces to take the lead themselves will be judged first, on their numbers and capability; secondly, the level of capacity of the provincial government to deal with the new security situation; thirdly, the level of support that it is necessary for us to give them; and, fourthly, the level of the terrorist threat.

As to the when, will that be an event? No, it will be a process. Will that process achieve the necessary conditions in every part of the country at the same time? No, so geographically, and in time lines, it will be a continuing process. Who will decide that? Obviously, at the end of the day every sovereign nation, including ourselves, has the right, if it so wishes, to make any decision that it wishes. The right hon. and learned Gentleman, or any other hon. Member, would not want us to take a decision that dishonoured a pledge that we made to the Iraqi people and to their democratically elected representatives. Of course, the decision will be made in consultation with the Iraqis. At the end of the day, the truth is that we do not want to be there any longer than necessary. Quite frankly, the Iraqi politicians, who are democratically elected and accountable to their people, do not want us there any longer than we are needed and necessary either. That is precisely what Prime Minister Jafaari and I said at the press conference some two weeks ago. However, if we read what he and President Talibani said this morning, it is obvious that the minority of terrorists who are attempting to claim that we are not there with the support of Iraqi people are being absolutely misleading. We are there, with the support of the Iraqi people, for as long as it is necessary to secure their own developing democracy.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman asks about air transport, and he has written to me on that point. I can tell him that we have done everything that we can to overcome those difficulties, and they have been overcome. Without going into details, the problem is very often not the aircraft, but having suitable aircraft with defensive suites. The safety of our troops travelling in and out of Iraq is paramount, and we have now managed to overcome the difficulties. The right hon. and learned Gentleman asked about the transitional period during which it is envisaged that the company from the reserve theatre in Cyprus might be deployed in Iraq. That is of the order of six weeks in operational terms.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman asked about the police in Basra and infiltration. In any theatre of combat in the world where competing factions have been at war with each other there is always a problem of split loyalties when rehabilitating and restructuring the police force afterwards. The question is not whether those split loyalties exist, but whether we can diminish them by human rights training and training the police to be as objective as possible. Wherever we look in the world, we find that policing is very often the last nut to be cracked. Incidentally, that applies in our own country, as well as in Bosnia or anywhere else. However, although there are certain elements in the police service in Iraq about whom we ought to be worried, I would not want him to believe that that is the majority or anything like it. Let us remember that every time Iraqi policemen put on their uniforms in the morning, they go out to face the threat of death. Many of them have died leading operations. Even in Basra, there were police around the Jameat police station trying to ensure that the 250 to 300 militant demonstrators did not approach it. So it is not the case that all the police, even in Basra, were antagonistic towards us.

We keep the issue of helicopters under review.

On the question of whether we reach out to Sunni politicians, I have to say that we reach out to everyone in Iraq. We will combat the terrorists, force with force, for as long as they deploy it. However, for any Sunni politician who wants to get involved in the process, we encourage the Shi'a to reach out their hands and arms to the Sunnis to be inclusive, and we encourage the Sunni politicians to engage in politics, not terrorism. That is the position that we take, and I think that it is the right one.

The whole House will be grateful to the Secretary of State for making his comprehensive statement this afternoon, immediately on our return. I join him and the shadow Secretary of State in offering condolences to the families and loved ones of those in the British armed forces who have given their lives on active service.

I also pay tribute to the continued bravery, dedication and professionalism of those in the armed forces who serve in Iraq, highlighted graphically by the appalling attacks on British forces in Basra and the events that followed. Does not that terrible episode, among many others, illustrate that the situation in Iraq is getting worse, rather than better? Should there not now be serious concerns about the relationship with the Iraqi security forces in Basra, given their apparent infiltration by the militias? Specifically, what resources are being channelled into improving intelligence gathering and force protection for our armed forces?

The Secretary of State highlighted the setting up the joint committee to transfer security responsibility, which is an important development. What steps are now required to confirm the principles and criteria set out in his statement? Have the events in Basra altered the time scale for the transfer of security responsibility to Iraqi forces in MND(SE) and what is his assessment of when that may now occur? Although we may all agree that we must not cut and run, just how long a haul does he now believe will be necessary before our troops will have finished their job?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his remarks about my making the statement immediately on the House's return. I wanted to do that because, on matters of life and death, I think that the House is entitled to an early statement. That is why I came to the House today.

I also held back the announcement of the troop roulement, so that the House could be the first to know. That has its disadvantages and I ask the House to bear with me. When I refused to answer questions on the issue over a period of several months, we got the speculation that we see in the press. One weekend, they say that everyone is immediately coming out of Iraq; the next, they say that there will be no withdrawal. I hope that hon. Members understand that none of this is our doing. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his words on that.

The hon. Gentleman says that the situation in Iraq is getting worse, but that is not a true picture. The situation is getting better in terms of the development of democratic agreement and institutions. The Iraqis have achieved in 14 months what it has taken this country several centuries to do, namely, to reach a general agreement on the disposition of devolved powers versus central powers and the coming together of the ethnic groups. That has taken something like several hundred years in this country, so let us give them credit for that. Previous combatants have come together to forget all their previous difficulties and to try to reach a conclusion.

The Iraqis have also made great progress—it is not getting worse—in their own security, which is the second objective. Despite everything that the terrorists are doing, the Iraqi security forces are becoming better trained, are more capable and are getting better and greater numbers than ever before.

The Iraqis are making some social and economic advances. They are not as fast as I would like—I fully admit that—because of terrorist activity, but there is a little more electricity than there was, a little more opportunity than there was and something like 240 hospitals are now operating that previously were not. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of kids are being vaccinated and a large number of schools are being rehabilitated, so there is some advance.

Against that, as the position gets better, the terrorists will get worse. They are involving themselves more and more viciously and frenetically. They are murdering children, and ordinary working Muslim men and women in Iraq are being massacred in their hundreds—cumulatively, in their thousands—in an attempt to destroy all these things.

I think that we should paint a balanced picture, giving credit to the democrats and the vast majority in Iraq rather than concentrating on the evil successes of those who are trying to destroy things. Part of that involves making sure that we put enough resources into the intelligence-led operations that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. I can tell him that the 12 arrests that took place on Friday were based on intelligence leads and that it was the British acting on their own who carried them out.

In terms of time scale, I say this: to give an immutable time scale to say that we will leave tomorrow or next month on a specific date is to send a postcard to the terrorists saying, "Hang on in until this date." We will not do what the Liberal party has asked us to do—either what has been asked by its leader, which is to cut and run immediately, or what has been asked by the hon. Gentleman and his colleague, which is a different thing. I have noticed the not so subtle difference between their and their leader's statements.

In fact, the hon. Gentleman's colleague has asked us to do what precisely what we are doing, which is to set out the terms on which there would be a handover. In all honesty, I have tried to do that today, and that is what we have done all along and will stick to. When the Iraqis have the capability and desire for us to go, we will go, but what we will not do is cut and run from the terrorists because things are getting tough or give the terrorists a date by which we will go, as that would be an invitation to them to hang on in until that date.

I was glad that the Secretary of State paid tribute to many people in the Iraqi police force, not only because we must build the police force as a strong body that is independent and free from corruption and infiltration if we are to achieve a decent civil society, but because the courage and dedication that many officers show just to go to work every day is quite extraordinary. I hope that all hon. Members agree with that. The right hon. Gentleman will know that the relationship between British troops and the local police force in any country in which they operate is often one of the most complicated and difficult—that is certainly true in Bosnia and Herzegovina and also in Kosovo. What measures is he putting in place to ensure that that relationship improves, that we have dealt with infiltration into the Iraqi police force, and that the special role that the British armed forces have often played in many parts of the world to build civil society is brought to the fore?

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments about the police because we must be balanced and remember that it takes a lot of courage to put on a police uniform in Basra, Baghdad or anywhere in Iraq, yet thousands of people are doing just that. We are trying to give what help we can not only to train people in the police service, but to promote quality—human rights, objectivity and neutrality. I do not pretend that there is a magic wand that we can wave. However, we have about 100 specialist police officers there at present. We have trained some 14,000 Iraqi police and we hope that the number will be 25,000 by the end of next year.

I do not underestimate for a moment the amount of time or the difficulties with training that are in front of us. However, to answer my hon. Friend's implied question—and the specific question asked by the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Moore)—I do not envisage a change to the projected time scale in which we might think that conditions would come to fruition to enable us to hand over. I see no reason to change the view that I held earlier in the year that we could start such a process during the course of next year.

We expect a lot of our troops and they never let us down, and now is not the time to call for British troops to be withdrawn from Iraq. However, how difficult is it for the Secretary of State to recruit and retain those troops at the moment? Will he give us current figures for recruitment and retention, not only in the Regular Army, but the Territorials? Is he worried, as I am, about overstretch in Iraq?

I thank the right hon. Gentleman, who now has an important position in holding the Government to account as Chairman of the Defence Committee, for his comments about the British forces. He is right that when they are asked to do something, they do it. They do not take part in controversy, debates or decisions—they just go and do it.

The right hon. Gentleman asked whether it is difficult to recruit. Yes, it is, and it has been for some time. We can speculate about the reasons for that and do what we can to try to discover and address those reasons, but one reason is certainly high employment and low unemployment, which has been the case for a while. The controversy surrounding training, Deepcut, bullying, Iraq and other issues probably does not help to convince the gatekeepers—the mums and dads—of the attraction of the armed forces. A range of issues might make it more difficult to recruit to a professional Army.

I have recently returned from Afghanistan, India and Pakistan. My hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for the middle east has visited Basra and elsewhere in Iraq. My right hon. Friend the Minister of State and I spend a lot of time with troops, so I can tell the right hon. Member for North-East Hampshire (Mr. Arbuthnot) that morale is high. Troops are given a great welcome by many Iraqis and by people in Afghanistan who recognise the important job that they are doing, contrary to some of the impressions given by the media here. His first comments welcoming the role that the troops are playing are an antidote to some of the reasons why we might be finding recruitment difficult.

In January, 8.5 million Iraqis bravely voted. That is about 60 per cent. of the people—a similar number to those who vote in our elections—and they had to defy terrorist bombs and threats of beheading. Part of the success of that election was due to the security ring around polling stations, in which the coalition forces played an important role. What measures are planned to assist with the security of the vote on 15 October and for the hoped-for parliamentary elections planned for December?

A great deal of thought has been given to that. Just as the terrorists have increased their activities in an attempt to disrupt and destroy those two steps in the democratic process—the referendum and then the elections—so, too, have we and, in particular, our allies and the Iraqi security forces made plans to try to ensure that Iraqis vote in peace. It is a symbol of the choice that is before us. However any hon. Member regarded the initial intervention in Iraq, the choice today is different. It is simply between the terrorists on the one side, who want to destroy democracy, and the United Nations, the multinational community and the Iraqi democrats on the other—[Interruption.] I am being shouted at. I do not know what is being said, but I commend the remarks made this morning by President Talibani, who said:

"Similarly, those who attack mosques and churches, who murder schoolchildren and labourers, who behead foreigners and who kidnap humanitarian workers are not engaged in 'resistance'. Those sabotaging Iraq's first democracy bear no resemblance to the resistors of foreign occupation in wartime Europe. Rather, they are, in their ideology and record, contemporary representatives of the fascism that wreaked such havoc 60 years ago in Europe. They are supremacists and racists, as worthy of our contempt as those who practised apartheid in South Africa."

I will stand by the words of the elected President of Iraq rather than by the terrorists who attempt to undermine democracy.

Last week in a press conference with President Talibani, the Prime Minister seemed to accuse the Iranian Government of involvement with the insurgency in the Basra area. The Secretary of State has not mentioned anything about that. Can he tell us about the reports of the use of shape-charged weapons against British forces which appear of a quality and a calibre that can be produced only under the auspices of a Government? Will he give a further analysis of the situation in Basra? Will it be considered for an early turnover of responsibility to the local Iraqi forces, because the situation there is different from that in the rest of the country?

On the second point, despite the difficulties that arose recently in Basra, in general terms the MND(SE) has had a better record of presiding over tranquillity and has experienced a lower number of incidents than many other parts of the country. We would want to study carefully whether the area might merit a handover earlier in the process rather than later.

I think that the hon. Gentleman was specifically asking whether the improvised explosive devices—the bombs—that have been used against our troops originate in Iran or have an Iranian connection. We cannot be sure of that at the moment but, as the Prime Minister confirmed last week, it is clear that new explosive devices have been used—incidentally, not just against British troops, but elsewhere in Iraq—and that the particular nature of those devices lead us to believe that they can be traced to either Hezbollah or elements associated with Hezbollah and Iran.

The new bomb technology is similar to devices used by Hezbollah, which, as hon. Members know, is supported and funded by Iran. We have welcomed Iran's public line of supporting the Iraqi elections and the efforts to support and build a constructive relationship with the new Iraqi Administration. We cannot tolerate a parallel policy of violence on anyone's part. Elements within or connected to the Iranian system—I put it no more strongly than that—seem to be encouraging violent opposition to multinational forces. That is a risky way for anyone to behave, so we hope that it does not continue.

We must not forget the important role being carried out in the area by the Royal Navy. I pay tribute to the ship's company of HMS Campbeltown, who I visited on station recently. They are protecting important oil installations. One observation that I made during the visit was that if we are to help develop the economy of Iraq, it is important that we re-establish some of the other routes that existed for exporting oil from that country. Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient engineering skill is being put in place by the oil industry in this difficult time to ensure that that happens?

My hon. Friend is always a great defender of the senior service, and on this occasion he is absolutely right: maritime security is very important in the situation in which we find ourselves. I know that there are difficulties in acquiring sufficient skills and personnel in zones that are regarded as hazardous or threatening and in war zones. Part of our challenge is to make sure that despite all the terrorists' efforts the social and economic framework is sufficiently secure to attract engineers and others with the skills that my hon. Friend mentions.

There is no doubt that what the vast majority of Iraqis want is self-determination for themselves, stability and security for their lives, and a better life. In that they are no different from any family in this country, and they are just as entitled to freedom and prosperity as families in this country.

Does the Secretary of State share the analysis that it was precisely because of the success of last January's elections that the insurgents decided to make Iraq the meeting engagement of our war against terrorism? If he does share that assessment, does he agree that we have to lick them there?

Yes, on both counts. There is no doubt in my mind that what is going on Iraq is not just a local tactical battle, important though it is to win that battle for the Iraqi people. It is probably, at the moment, the most important battlefield of a strategic nature between those who wish to impose a religious dictatorship not only on large sections of the middle east but further afield and those who believe that Arab peoples and Muslims are as entitled to democratic self-determination as anyone else. If the Iraqi people build, in an Arab Muslim state in the middle east, their own form of democracy and safeguard it, it will be a major strategic blow to the terrorists. If, on the other hand, the terrorists succeed in stopping that happening, it will be a major success for the terrorists. The terrorists understand the strategic nature of this battle. The hon. Gentleman understands the strategic nature of this battle. I just wish that every leading commentator and politician in western Europe understood the strategic nature of this battle.

Will the Secretary of State reaffirm that we will not be handing over responsibility unless or until we are satisfied that the Iraqi armed forces pass the litmus test for a democratic Government of being under the democratic control of a civilian Minister? We have a long way to go yet.

In that regard, will the Secretary of State use his good offices to reaffirm the United Kingdom's concern to ensure that the people at Camp Ashraf, Iranian refugees, continue to enjoy protected person status and do not become the Cossacks of this period? The great fear is that they will be treated in the same way as the Cossacks were treated in 1945. The people of Camp Ashraf must have the protection of both the United Kingdom and—I hope my right hon. Friend will emphasise to his friends when he meets them—the Iraqi Government. Discuss.

I thank my hon. Friend who, as usual, has set me an exam question in some detail. Thankfully on the Front Bench, one is allowed to cheat a bit by discussing things with one's fellow Ministers. Yes, I can give my hon. Friend that specific assurance. I can also refer to his general question about the democratic control of the security forces. That is very important. I discuss the matter from time to time with Mr. Al-Dulaimi, the Iraqi Defence Minister. We do what we can to ensure that we are training Iraqi security forces—the army—not only in martial arts but in human rights and the treatment of prisoners. We will continue to do that, and they are developing apace in that direction.

These things are not easy after decades under Saddam in which, let us remember, members of some of the parties that are agreeing and bringing in the Sunni had their women, children and innocent civilians gassed and burned from the inside out by mustard gas. The Shi'a have been killed, starved, had their water removed and been massacred in their thousands—in some ways in their hundreds of thousands—so to see people come together in the armed forces and apply a level of objectivity under democratic control is a major step forward.

I agree with the Secretary of State that any troop withdrawal will have to be events-led; it is plain that that is the case.

Having been out to Iraq in March, I fully commend what the Secretary of State says about the professionalism and dedication of the servicemen and women, but might I ask him one thing? We are led to believe that the Attorney-General is at this moment on his way to Iraq to look at the judicial authorities and the way in which things are working or not working. My plea is on behalf of my late constituent, Lance Corporal Tom Keys, who was one of six military policemen murdered at al-Majaar al-Kabir. I ask the Government to ensure that the perpetrators of that awful crime are brought to book fairly swiftly.

In extending once again my condolences to the family of the hon. Gentleman's constituent, may I say that that has always been our earnest wish? I must make it plain to the House that matters of investigation and prosecution, whether of those attacking our troops or concerning allegations against our troops, are conducted separately to and independently of not only the chain of command, but the chain of command of Ministers here. So, we can take neither credit nor blame.

That is not a way of stepping back from responsibility—I expressed my earnest wish—but a way of being clear to the House that when and if charges are brought against our soldiers or against others for attacks on our soldiers, the process is conducted by an independent Army prosecution authority which, although part of the MOD, is accountable to the Attorney-General. Therefore, I cannot answer any specific points for the Attorney-General, but I wholeheartedly and earnestly support the hon. Gentleman's wish that there be a speedy bringing to book of those who murdered military policemen.

In his statement, while telling us about progress that had been made, the Secretary of State clearly acknowledged that his ultimate aims of democracy and security in Iraq were still to be reached, and he talked about the battle of Iraq and the number of Iraqi civilians who are still dying. In the light of that, will he suggest to his colleagues in the Home Office that it would be premature for them to start the enforced return of failed asylum seekers to Iraq?

I am sure that the Home Secretary heard my hon. Friend's comment.

The Secretary of State mentioned obstacles to the exit strategy. Does he agree that if Iran's alleged activities continue, that will create a new obstacle to the exit strategy, regardless of whether the current obstacles have been removed when that judgment is made?

I think I made the precise point that terrorist activity and, by implication, those assisting such activity do nothing to hasten the withdrawal of multinational forces from Iraq—indeed, they delay withdrawal, because one of the four criteria by which we judge the conditions in which we would hand over power and the lead in security to the Iraqis is the level of the threat from terrorists. Therefore, by definition, anything that increases the level of that threat diminishes the propensity to withdraw.

Once again, my right hon. Friend has set out a balanced statement of the successes and the challenges that remain. Yesterday, Lord Boyce, a former defence chief, said how demoralising it is for our troops to hear only the bad news in the media. Is there anything my right hon. Friend can do to highlight more of the successes, so that the "Today" programme could at least take them on board?

Far be it from me to launch an undeserved and prejudiced attack on the "Today" programme, whose staff I have always found to be objective observers of events in Iraq. We should note the comments made yesterday by the former Chief of the Defence Staff, Lord Boyce, who in my last interview was used as an example to me of how everything was completely black in terms of overstretch and so on. I think that he put the record straight.

The truth is that people in this country are mature enough to know that we are in the course of a very deep and desperate struggle against terrorism internationally and that Iraq is one of the theatres in which that struggle is at its bloodiest. That is precisely because of the point made by the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne): it is not a local but a big strategic issue. I believe, the Government believe, and I hope that the House believes that those who happen to be Arabs or Muslims have no less right than people in this country to democratic self-determination of their future. As they grasp that right to self-determination, to build democratic institutions in their own shape, as well as the security forces to protect them, and to achieve greater prosperity for their people, we should stand beside them. There will be difficulties, perhaps even greater than those we face now if the terrorists have their way, but we will see our way through those difficulties and stand by the Iraqi people. I have no doubt that, ultimately, the Iraqi people will grasp self-determination and defeat the terrorists.

Will the Secretary of State accept from me the Democratic Unionist party's expression of support and admiration for the United Kingdom forces in Iraq? They have shown tremendous dignity, dedication and fortitude in the midst of great danger and they have set a great example to us all. I join in expressing extreme and humble gratitude to those members of our security forces who have made the supreme sacrifice in Iraq since last we met in this House. I also offer my condolences to their families, who must be heartbroken at this time.

Does the Secretary of State agree with me that those who stand in public life in Iraq deserve our support? They face tremendous danger, as do those who join the security forces in Iraq every time they put on their uniform and go out. The House must realise that terrorism is a reality: the people of Northern Ireland have experienced it for 30 years. It is great to be an armchair critic when one is far away from world events, but does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, now more than ever, we must ensure that our security forces receive the wholehearted support of this House and the people of the United Kingdom in our efforts to build a democratic Iraq? Finally, may I say—

Order. We have heard sufficient for the Secretary of State to digest.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. I hope that I am not misreading the House, but I thought that every statement that has been made today has been made with an awareness of the resonance that these statements can carry outside the House. I think that there has been a mature and sensitive contribution from every Member who has spoken today, including even those who may have had difficulties with, or deep opposition to, the original intervention in Iraq. I think that there is a coming together of the House that says that we should see this through but at the same time ensure that we are not there any longer than is necessary. That is exactly where I and the Government are.

I fully concur with the comments that the Secretary of State made about the military. I wish that the whole of the House was fully in agreement in that respect. Perhaps that day will come.

I question the Secretary of State on the political commitment that we have. The blueprint at present is for a constitution to try to unite one entire country out of three quite separate groupings. My concern is that in the north we have the Kurds, with the Shi'ites and the Sunnis being separate entities. The Kurds are already operating on their own, and they have their own Prime Minister. Violence is increasing and my worry is that we will end up with Iraq moving towards civil war or, alternatively, British forces and others will be in Iraq for an awfully long time unless more autonomy is given, not only geographically but politically, to the three distinct grouping to which I have referred.

Despite all the predictions, the self-discipline shown by the majority of the groups has been huge. It is not an easy thing for people to come together to define a new constitution when, as has been said, there are long memories of difficulties, death, dangers and opposition to one another. It has been put to me that there is always the chance that the Iraqi people will vote down the constitution. I am asked, given that situation, "What do they do?" What they do is what any democracy does; they go back and discuss the matter again. I hope that it will not take as long as it took us, having voted down Scottish devolution, to get round to bringing it in again. If my memory serves me correctly, that took 21 years.

Let us remember that despite all the difficulties the Iraqis have got where they are, with 155 out of 157 articles of the constitution having been agreed almost unanimously and with debate on two of them. That is a major step forward. I have every confidence in the Iraqi people being able to debate these matters and to take the decision on their own democratically. That is what we are trying to help them build.

I agree with the Secretary of State that terrorist activity should not hasten our departure from Iraq. I agree also on the need to support our troops, who have been plunged into a Herculean task. Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he thinks it satisfactory that militias are lined up as the private armies of members of the Government of Iraq? Does he think that it was merely an aberration that on 19 September our soldiers were handed over to private militias? Does he believe that the governor of Basra, Mohammed al-Waili, is helping to maintain morale at home when he says that British troops are responsible for destabilising security in the province?

It will not surprise the hon. Gentleman to know that I think that the governor was wrong when he asked me whether the capture or the handover of two British soldiers to what appears to us to be militiamen was an aberration. By definition, as it is the first time that it has happened, it was an aberration. That does not make me complacent in the least.

If the hon. Gentleman is asking me—I think he is—whether there are elements within the Iraqi police force who may have joined with a view to usurping the authority and arms of the police service to the benefit of one particular grouping in the community, I think that there are. They are not the majority. They are not the majority even in Basra. It is necessary for the leadership of the Iraqis to show strong leadership as well as it is necessary for us to take action to defend our troops, which is why we arrested 12 further people on Friday of last week. We will continue to do what is necessary, within the legal framework in which we operate, to defend our troops and to train the Iraqi police service in human rights and objectivity as well as in the martial skills.

The Secretary of State announced this afternoon that the 2nd Battalion the Parachute Regiment based in Colchester garrison is to be deployed yet again to Iraq—no happy family Christmas for its members to look forward to. Without putting a time limit on that deployment, can the right hon. Gentleman give an indication of how long the 2nd Battalion will be in Iraq this time before it is replaced by other British troops? Can he also tell us what percentage of the British Army has served in Iraq over the period that we have been there?

On one of the points that the hon. Gentleman raised, six months' deployment, like everyone else. On the 2nd Battalion the Parachute Regiment—great people. I had the privilege of spending some time with them as a younger MP under the armed forces parliamentary scheme, so I suppose that in some terrible way, they are responsible for my being at the Dispatch Box. I cannot think of better people to send into dangerous situations. The hon. Gentleman's third question was about the percentage of British troops who have been in Iraq. The number of British troops who have been there is about 90,000. We are now on the seventh roulement. With all taken into account, a large number of people have gone through it. When we see the headlines about this or that case of alleged brutality or alleged misdemeanour, let us remember that against some 90,000 troops who have served in Iraq there have been about 160 allegations, of which substance has been found to about 15 or 20. That puts the matter into perspective. Given the number of troops, it is right and to be expected that we would come back to the Parachute Regiment again, but of course many others are being deployed as well. We should remember that as Secretary of State, I am completely unbiased, and they are all just as good as the Parachute Regiment.

The Secretary of State is right that many thousands of people have been killed in Iraq. One of the common threads in many of those attacks is organisations advertising for workers. A thousand Iraqis turn up, one turns up with a bomb, and hundreds are dead and hundreds are maimed. What measures are we taking as a Government and a coalition to reduce the number of targets for those terrorists to attack?

We are doing everything we possibly can on our own. We are doing everything we can to expand the number of trained Iraqi security forces in the army, the Ministry of the Interior and the police, but ultimately, as we found out in London, New York, Madrid, Tanzania, Kenya, Egypt, Turkey, Bali and everywhere else the terrorists get through, it is not always possible to stop them, particularly when they regard the country as a major strategic battlefield and they are throwing in terrorists from outside to combine with elements of the Fascist regime that ran the country for so long. As the position gets better in terms of democracy, security forces and economic development, we can expect the terrorists to get more frenetic and more frantic. That is why I said today that I cannot promise that that will not happen, but we will see it through.

With permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the earthquake in south Asia.

On Saturday 8 October, just before nine o'clock in the morning Pakistan time, an earthquake struck measuring 7.6 on the Richter scale. Its epicentre was in the area of Muzaffarabad in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, about 95 kilometres north-east of Islamabad. It caused widespread damage and a significant number of deaths and injuries.

I would like to tell the House about the action taken by the Government and others in support of those affected by this disaster, but first, I am sure that all Members will wish to express their profound sadness at the loss of life. Our thoughts are with all those families, both in the countries affected and here, who have lost loved ones in this terrible tragedy.

This was a major earthquake with tremors felt as far afield as Afghanistan and India, followed by a series of frightening aftershocks. The latest official figures indicate that 20,000 people have lost their lives and 44,000 have been injured. However, given the scale of the destruction and the fact that some areas have not yet been reached, the number of deaths is expected to rise further. There have also been a small number of deaths reported in Afghanistan, and 750 people now confirmed dead in north India, although unconfirmed reports indicate a significantly higher loss of life there, with 80 per cent. of houses in Uri and the surrounding district severely damaged. India has not sought international assistance. The greatest loss of life, however, has been caused by the devastation in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the North West Frontier Province. Conditions there are difficult for relief workers, with bad weather and problems with access and communications due to landslides. Fifty per cent. of the buildings in Muzaffarabad and 60 per cent. in Balakot appear to have been destroyed.

Across the affected areas the Pakistan authorities, the Pakistan Red Crescent Society and local people have been working tirelessly to support survivors and the injured. As always in disasters, it is local people who have led the effort to saves lives. The Government of Pakistan have set up a national response centre and a relief fund.

When the earthquake struck, the UK immediately offered assistance, and as soon as a request for help was received, the Department for International Development activated the search and rescue teams which we had already put on standby. The first search and rescue team of 12 people, provided by the non-governmental organisation RAPID, left the UK in the early evening. It was the first international team to arrive in Pakistan, and a DFID humanitarian adviser went with it to facilitate its arrival and to begin co-ordination on the ground.

At 2 am GMT on Sunday, an aircraft chartered by DFID left East Midlands airport carrying 75 search and rescue personnel from the fire brigades of Grampian, Lancashire, Lincolnshire and Manchester, the International Rescue Corps, and dog rescue teams from BIRD and CANIS, together with a further team from RAPID. The flight included a four-person DFID team to undertake assessment and co-ordination. The remaining space was loaded with blankets and other supplies. The British high commission and DFID's Pakistan office helped the teams to get into action immediately on arrival yesterday. The first RAPID search and rescue team was deployed to a collapsed tower block in Islamabad to help look for survivors. The second RAPID team and CANIS, with dog support, later joined it. The other search and rescue teams were flown to Muzaffarabad by the Pakistani military, where they have been looking for survivors in collapsed schools. The UK search and rescue teams have already made an important contribution and rescued a number of people.

In addition to this assistance, DFID Pakistan immediately provided financial help in order to buy vital emergency supplies. Also on Saturday we agreed a grant to the World Health Organisation to enable it to send emergency health and trauma kits to support 40,000 people for three months.

Shelter is an urgent priority as night temperatures fall. We are providing 1,000 winter tents and 10,000 tarpaulins to Islamic Relief from our existing stocks in Lahore. These are being trucked to Muzaffarabad as we speak. We are also sending additional tents and blankets from our stocks in Dubai, and we will fly out 19,000 blankets from our Marchington store also for distribution by Islamic Relief. The US Government are providing five Chinook and three Black Hawk helicopters today to help move people and supplies. This will make a significant difference to the relief effort. DFID is currently looking at options for further such assistance in conjunction with the EU and the UN.

I have today informed the Disasters Emergency Committee agencies that the Government will meet the cost of transporting any of its relief supplies from the UK to Pakistan. Total UK assistance so far in the first 48 hours, including through the EU, is already over £1 million and that will increase as we provide further financial support to the relief effort. We will continue to do everything that we can to help.

Acting as the EU presidency, we are liaising with EU member states in offering help, and the European Commission yesterday announced some £2.5 million for emergency assistance. We are working with the United Nations and other agencies, such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent, as well as with the Pakistani authorities, and the UN is expected to launch a flash appeal for emergency relief assistance later today.

Many people in the Pakistani community in Britain have friends and loved ones in the disaster area. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office sent out on the first relief flight a rapid deployment team, which has set up an operations centre in Islamabad to assist British nationals. An FCO helpline in London is assisting concerned relatives. So far, there have been no reports of any British casualties.

The response from within Pakistan and around the world shows the best of human nature at a time of crisis, and the UK will continue to play its full part in helping to ensure that those who have suffered so much in this terrible tragedy get the help and succour that they need over the coming days and weeks.

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and for giving me advance sight of it.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of those who have lost friends and relatives in this tragedy. As so often in such awful circumstances, we are indebted to those whose hard work and dedicated efforts are helping to bring comfort to those who are in desperate need. In particular, I pay tribute to the efforts of RAPID UK whose search and rescue teams have already saved lives in Pakistan. That is just one example of how the UK is helping.

Many hon. Members have constituents who have relatives in the affected areas. As we speak, thousands of our constituents are waiting anxiously for news about their families and friends, and the thoughts of all of us are with them at this dreadful time.

The Pakistani President has appealed for international assistance, and the British people, and especially those with links to the communities affected, are already giving with their characteristic generosity.

Inevitably, children are suffering most acutely. Perhaps the Secretary of State will say a little more about how he plans to ensure that children's specific needs are addressed in response to this crisis.

The Asian tsunami taught us some painful lessons about the need for a joined-up aid delivery effort. Will the Secretary of State inform us of the steps that he has taken to help ensure that those lessons have been learned and implemented? In particular, what discussions has he had with the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs?

During the tsunami crisis earlier this year, some concern was expressed about the service that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office offered to relatives of those involved in the disaster. Will the Secretary of State assure us that the FCO is doing everything possible to assist those who have relatives in the affected areas—obviously, I acknowledge that that is extremely difficult at this time? Is he satisfied that enough people are manning the emergency information helpline for relatives? Is information about those who are missing being collated and disseminated as effectively as possible? What arrangements have been made for Britons who return to the UK having lost relatives?

The earthquake has struck in a highly sensitive part of the world. What is the Secretary of State's assessment of the appropriate role for British troops stationed in the area? Are British troops in Afghanistan helping with the relief effort there? Is the Secretary of State satisfied that co-ordination between DFID and the Ministry of Defence is adequate?

Will the Secretary of State assure the House that he is doing everything he can to ensure a joined-up approach with the work being done by the leaders of the Muslim, Pakistani and Kashmiri communities in Britain, who are already doing so much to help the relief effort? Perhaps he will say a little more at this early stage about any plans that his Department has to support community-based non-governmental organisations in their response to the disaster?

In the aftermath of the tsunami, concern was expressed about the operation of gift aid tax relief on donations to the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal. At this early stage, what steps will the Government take to encourage such tax relief on donations to appeals for this disaster?

The Secretary of State has proposed a standing UN disasters fund—a pot of money that could be drawn upon in the event of a crisis like this, which would remove the need individually to negotiate with Governments each time a disaster occurs. That idea seems sensible and constructive, and, as he knows, Conservative Members support it. What is the status of the Secretary of State's discussions with his international counterparts on such a fund?

Once again, we thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House and making his statement at the first available opportunity. In the same spirit, I hope that he will continue to keep the House informed through written and oral statements.

I thank the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell) for his kind words. He gives me the opportunity also to extend my thanks to the DFID team who have been working since the early hours of Saturday morning to do the work that has enabled me to describe the response of the British Government. We owe them a very big debt of gratitude.

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern for the children of the affected region. One thing that is happening immediately is that the search and rescue teams in Muzaffarabad are trying to find the children in the schools. They were first directed to those schools when they arrived, because parents in the local community are desperately worried about those who may still be trapped and can be rescued. I undertake to consider that in the decisions that we reach about funding the UN flash appeal, which, as I say, we expect later today or early tomorrow. Let me tell the House that we will make a significant contribution. I will consider what particularly we can do for children, but their needs for blankets, tents, water and medical supplies are the same as those of their parents and families.

The hon. Gentleman asked about co-ordination. That is very important, which is why we sent a team of four out on the first relief flight to link up with the UN disaster assessment team that arrived from Geneva yesterday and with the co-ordinating unit that the Prime Minister of Pakistan has established. I spoke to the team just before coming to the House. The reports show that the co-ordination is not working badly, bearing in mind the fact that this is a major emergency that is putting great stress and strain on the Government of Pakistan in particular. I am anxious, as ever, that we learn the lessons. There is a premium on good information, because it ensures that the help that is being offered can be sent to the right places as quickly as possible.

I am happy to offer the hon. Gentleman reassurance that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is doing everything that it can; indeed, it put a team on the first relief flight to support the high commission. I pay tribute to Mark Lyall-Grant and his team for the outstanding work that they are doing.

The Red Cross is looking to provide a service on tracing missing relatives. I am conscious of the Pakistani community here in the UK, although most of their families come from the region that is slightly less affected than the epicentre of the earthquake. Thankfully, no British casualties have yet been reported, but we wait to see what happens in time. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I, along with other Members, have large Kashmiri and Pakistani communities in our constituencies.

NATO is considering what contribution the international security assistance force might be able to provide to the effort that is being made. The hon. Gentleman makes a very good suggestion about leaders of the Muslim and Kashmiri community. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will shortly organise a meeting to talk to them. One of the ways in which we will provide support is through our offer to the Disasters Emergency Committee relief agencies to fund the flight. If any smaller community organisations have things that they wish to get there, they can link up with one of the DEC bodies to get them on to the flight, and the Government will pick up the transportation costs.

On gift aid, the hon. Gentleman may be aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced that he will make it possible for that to be applied to telephone donations, to make it easier for people's money to have a full effect.

Finally, on the humanitarian fund, about three weeks ago the UN summit agreed to support the principle of an enlarged emergency fund. I am able to report to the House that following a meeting that was hosted by a couple of other countries two days later, six nations have already agreed to put $150 million into the fund. Just under half of that will come from the United Kingdom. Several other countries that attended expressed support for the principle and are waiting to see what the arrangements will be. I am hopeful that by the middle of next year we will have a fund up and running, which I called for last December. That will mean that in such circumstances the UN has the money to get on with the job while the rest of us pitch in and help.

May I also thank the Secretary of State for providing me with early sight of his statement? On behalf of my hon. Friends, I echo the profound sympathy that has been expressed for those who have been affected by the devastating earthquake.

Like the Secretary of State, I recognise that Britain has a special relationship with Pakistan and India and that, with more than 700,000 Kashmiris resident in the United Kingdom, the support that the Government offer those who fear that they have friends or loved ones who have been caught up in the disaster is greatly appreciated. I welcome the support so far and the efficiency with which it has been provided and planned.

On the Secretary of State's last comment about community-based organisations, the offer of help to agencies that provide emergency relief is much appreciated. I am sure that he knows that, as well as those mentioned in his statement, the Shelter Box appeal, which provided so many shelter boxes after the tsunami, especially for Sri Lanka, is also providing hundreds of shelter boxes this week from Helston in my constituency. The support that the organisation provides and the connection with the rotary club in Islamabad is greatly appreciated.

According to United Nations estimates, 2.5 million people require shelter. The tens of thousands of shelters, tents, blankets and other forms of support that the Secretary of State mentioned will clearly make a contribution but could he please comment on the international community's assessment of its capacity to respond to the urgent need for shelter, especially given the extreme cold at night in the region?

The Secretary of State did not answer the question that the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell) asked about assistance that may be available through the Ministry of Defence, especially given the capacity just over the border in Afghanistan. Will he comment on whether resources will be made available from the international security assistance force that is based there?

What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the security situation in Kashmir? Only yesterday, terrorists killed 10 people in Kashmir and Jammu. What support can the UK offer to ensure secure access for humanitarian assistance to that region? What discussions have his officials held with the Kashmir International Relief Fund, which has logistical expertise and volunteers on the ground in Kashmir?

May I probe the Secretary of State a little more about the co-ordination of assistance? The hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield rightly raised issues about the important role that the United Nations has to play. In answer, the Secretary of State referred to the co-ordination of assistance in the emergency that we are considering. However, he will know that the Red Cross reported last week that rivalries between hundreds of groups and perceptions of corruption and the politicisation of aid has led to the duplication of effort in some areas and a failure to get the aid to those most in need when responding to such emergencies. Does the Secretary of State agree that the United Nations' capacity must be built up so that it is better able to respond to the support and co-ordination of emergency relief through the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs and its agents?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind words and I pay tribute to the work of Shelter Box. When I was in Sri Lanka after the tsunami, I saw some of the Shelter Box tents being put up on a playing field next to a school and I know about the contributions of rotary clubs to making them available to those who need them. I am sure that they will be much appreciated by those who require shelter.

On the great wish of the community in the UK to assist, the best thing that people can do is contribute money because that ensures that the things that are needed are bought. We do not want to end up with an excess of one sort of supply and a shortage of others. If people are looking to assist, the most helpful thing is to contribute money.

I said earlier that NATO was considering what could be done; it is looking specifically at the resources that might be available in ISAF in Afghanistan because it is close by. That is currently being examined.

I am of course aware of the security concerns. The incident to which the hon. Gentleman referred was on the Indian side of the line of control. So far, there is no indication that the fact that this is a sensitive and difficult region has got in the way of the relief effort. Indeed, our experience in Aceh in Indonesia, which was similarly plagued by conflict, showed that when a disaster of this magnitude strikes, people tend to put all that on one side and get on with the task in hand, which is to help people who are in need.

I have not spoken to the Kashmir International Relief Fund, but I will find out whether my officials have done so and let the hon. Gentleman know. The Red Cross report, to which the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell) alluded, is an important piece of work. There was particular concern about the number of small relief organisations coming in, but I would just say that the United Nations disaster team has deployed eight people. They have established on-site operations co-ordination centres in both Islamabad and Muzaffarabad, and we are working closely with them and with the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs to ensure that there is effective co-ordination on the ground.

I completely agree with the hon. Member for St. Ives (Andrew George) about the capacity of the United Nations system. Indeed, the proposals that I and others have made are precisely to strengthen that capacity, not only through a fund—which will mean that it does not have to wait for the hat to be passed round in order to respond immediately—but through strengthening the quality and capacity of humanitarian co-ordinators, because dealing with this kind of an emergency is a very different task from being the resident co-ordinator. I have also proposed that we introduce benchmarks by which we can measure our progress in responding to emergency needs. There will no doubt be lessons from this disaster that we can put into the work that we and others are undertaking.

rose—

Order. Hon. Members will understand that this is the second major statement of the day, and that I have important business to protect. I understand why many hon. Members wish to question the Secretary of State on this matter, but it would assist us in making progress if we could have brief questions and short answers.

I thank my right hon. Friend for the Government's swift and effective response, and acknowledge that many people in this country will want to give their support and make an active response as well. Those of us who know the stricken areas well—including the devastated city of Muzaffarabad, to which access is difficult at the best of times—will want to send our sympathy to the families and friends of all those who have suffered, and to their loved ones in this country who are so worried about what has taken place. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if there is one encouraging aspect of this disaster, it is that the Indian and Pakistani authorities and troops are working together, and that if any good at all is to come out of this tragedy, it would be for their Governments and others to work together to bring about a settlement for Kashmir?

I am certain that my right hon. Friend's words of compassion will be gratefully received, and I can only echo his sentiments. One hopes that good will come out of this terrible disaster.

I am also grateful to the Secretary of State for his statement and to the Government for their prompt response in a variety of practical ways, which is what people need. In particular, I notice that President Musharraf asked for helicopters, and that helicopters have been provided. Speed of response to these disasters is crucial, and one of the most anguishing aspects of this one was hearing tales of children crying in the ruins and people not being able to get to them in time. Is there anything that we can do to achieve an even more rapid response in future? Does the Secretary of State also recognise that, after the initial response, the economy of Pakistan will face a major rebuilding challenge? Will that lead to a review of DFID policies and DFID aid programmes in Pakistan and Kashmir?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his questions. We always need to ensure that we get search and rescue teams to a disaster as quickly as possible. As I have said, the first international team to arrive was from the UK, and it was one of the biggest teams. It went out there within a very short period of time, and many other search and rescue teams are now arriving from around the world. They are being deployed to the areas in need. I pay tribute to the speed with which our teams got themselves to East Midlands airport and on to those planes. Of course, we shall review our programme. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have a substantial programme in Pakistan: £74 million this year. As well as committing resources to the relief effort we shall of course do the same for reconstruction, but that is a little way off. For now, we shall concentrate on immediate assistance.

I, too, thank my right hon. Friend for his Department's speedy response to the disaster. On television this morning, he will have seen President Musharraf making a moving appeal, especially for doctors, surgeons and consultants. Will that represent part of my right hon. Friend's comprehensive response?

What we have funded at the moment are the emergency health and trauma kits to which I referred earlier. On Saturday, the World Health Organisation put out an appeal for $500,000-worth of assistance and the UK picked up half the cost of that. We did that straight away on the first day. I have no doubt that when the UN flash appeal comes out shortly there will be a request for support to provide that kind of assistance. It may be helpful if I tell the House that there were two hospitals in Muzaffarabad. One was destroyed; the other is functioning but is severely overstretched and I understand that a French field hospital is on its way to provide help to the people there.

The argument for a substantially enlarged UN disaster emergency fund is unassailable. The Secretary of State said that so far only six countries had committed to it. Which G8 member states have yet to sign up to the Secretary of State's excellent idea? It must now be unassailable and there can be no excuse, certainly for G8 countries not to dig deep into their pockets to support that initiative.

I will send the hon. Gentleman a list of the countries. To be fair, some G8 countries present at the meeting support the idea but are waiting to see exactly what the management arrangements will be. He and I, and many others, think this a good idea; it is timely and if it was in place we could move even faster. We have learned the lessons and the fact that there is now support for the fund means, I hope, that in the future the UN will be able to respond even quicker. It would certainly have helped in Niger.

The devastating earthquake in south Asia has wiped out whole communities in many places. Tens of thousands of people have lost their lives. Millions of people have been made homeless. That huge loss of life is tragic and our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. The Government's swift response in providing assistance for the relief effort is welcome. People are dying every hour. Does my right hon. Friend agree that due to the magnitude of the tragedy we need to provide greater humanitarian aid and assistance to ensure that the people who survived the disaster do not die of hunger, disease and cold?

I agree completely. Currently, the issue is not money, because we shall put in the resources that are needed; it is how quickly we can get practical help to those in need. Where can we obtain the blankets, the tents, the medical supplies, the food, the water, the shelter, the heavy digging equipment and the helicopters? That is the issue. We are responding to the requests that have come to us. As I said, we shall fund significantly the UN appeal when it comes out. It is important for the House to recognise that the issue is the practical help that we give, not the sums pledged at the beginning. Britain has an honourable tradition, but some countries pledge large sums yet six months later we find that not all of that money was spent. I am much more interested in concentrating on the practical work in hand, which is turning the passion, commitment and desire of the British people to help into practical assistance on the ground. That is what we did in the first 48 hours and that is exactly what we shall carry on doing.

Our communities will welcome what the Secretary of State said and the way in which he said it, especially his point that it is a matter of co-operation rather than competition.

I have two practical points. How long will it take to replace the emergency stocks of tents and other things? Man-made and natural disasters seem to come around rather more regularly than one used to expect. Secondly, on a minor but important point, will there be difficulty in readmitting the search dogs to Britain?

On the first point that the hon. Gentleman raises, we will look to replace the tents as soon as possible. Indeed, I was discussing that with the team just before I came to the House.

On the second question, as I recollect, I think that quarantine arrangements are applied to those dogs, but I will check on the position and write to the hon. Gentleman.

As I represent the constituency in this country where the largest number of British Kashmiris live—they are mostly from Mirpur, Dadyal and Jakswari—may I extend, as other hon. Members have done, my sincerest condolences to the President, Prime Minister and people of Azad Kashmir on this terrible tragedy? I pay tribute to the work that the British Government have done already, but will the Minister give an assurance that, once the immediate relief efforts have been responded to, the British Government will use their position of presidency of the European Union for six months to seek to co-ordinate long-term relief to ensure that the infrastructure of that area is put back together and that the people are not forgotten at the end of the immediate aftermath?

I am sure that my hon. Friend's words will be much appreciated by those who are listening. I am happy to give that assurance. Indeed, I will discuss the crisis with EU Development Ministers at our informal meeting, to be held at the end of this month. Clearly, as we move from relief to reconstruction, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the European Commission will have a very significant role to play. I can assure him that, during our EU presidency, we will ensure that all that support is brought to bear to back the reconstruction of the affected regions, once the immediate need for relief has been dealt with.

Will the Secretary of State join me in congratulating the Scottish-based charities and international organisations on their superb effort in responding with typical generosity? Does he agree that the next 24 to 48 hours are absolutely critical to demonstrate to an increasingly desperate and frustrated people that the aid is getting through? Can he assure me that the UK Government are doing all that they can to ensure that the infrastructure is being improved so that the aid can get through?

I am very happy to join the hon. Gentleman in those expressions of thanks to the agencies to which he refers. I can simply give him that assurance. I have reported to the House on what we have done in the first 48 hours. We intend to carry on. I pay tribute particularly to the military in Pakistan who have helped to clear the road to Muzaffarabad, thus allowing buses to go up to support the search and rescue team and tents from Lahore to arrive so that they can be distributed. They are continuing to work to open more roads because a lot more relief supplies can be brought in by road than by helicopters.

Many of us have Pakistani constituents who come from Kashmir, particularly Mirpur. As yet, I have not been able to find out what impact the earthquake has had on Mirpur. I wonder whether my right hon. Friend could inform me of that. My other concern is that, long before the earthquake, there were many homeless people in the area around Muzaffarabad owing to its proximity to the line of control. They were in displaced persons camps or in refugee camps. I wonder what their position is now.

The worst of the damage has clearly been around Muzaffarabad, Balakot and those parts around the epicentre. I think that the damage in Mirpur has been less extensive. I will find out whether we have further details that I can give to my hon. Friend. I am not aware of the position of those who were living in the refugee camps around the town, but from the pictures that I have seen and the reports that we have, I am sure that the damage is pretty extensive and that they have been badly affected, along with all the other residents of the town.

Clearly, the initial search and rescue operation and the speed of our response have been excellent, but does the Secretary of State recall the correspondence that we had quite a few months ago about constituents of mine who went as volunteers into areas that had been devastated by the tsunami only to find that no aid whatsoever for reconstruction had got through months after those vast sums had been raised? Therefore, the report should not have come as a surprise to any of us. Can he suggest measures that will address that concern, which has been expressed from every corner of the House?

The hon. Gentleman raises a very important point. The issue is partly about ensuring that the right relief supplies come, and I made that point earlier. If things are sent that are not immediately needed, they may rest on one side while more important things pass on their way through. There may be bureaucratic obstacles, but the UN team and, I am sure, the co-ordinating office of the Prime Minister of Pakistan will be working very hard to ensure that they do not happen. A practical example of that here in the United Kingdom is that the Pakistan high commission has set up emergency arrangements for issuing visas for people from Britain who want to travel to Pakistan and Kashmir quickly. I applaud it for what it has done. We will keep the situation under very close review. If difficulties arise, we will do our best to have them sorted out. It is important that we learn the lessons.

My friend the Secretary of State told us that 50 per cent. of the buildings in Muzaffarabad had been destroyed, but people may understandably be reluctant to go into the buildings that are still standing. Have any requests been made to us to supply civil engineers and people like that who could pronounce on the integrity of the structures that are still standing?

We have not had any requests as far as I am aware, but I am told that one of the consequences of the construction of the buildings is that the walls tend to fall outwards when an earthquake strikes and the roofs come in. People will understandably be reluctant to go back into buildings that have been damaged even though they may appear to be standing. We will consider all such requests, but I think that they will come in time. The immediate priority is to get shelter to people who need it and who are out in the cold.

Many Members on both sides of the House will have constituents who are waiting to hear accurate information about what has happened to their friends and loved ones. In the near future, many people in this country may want to offer a place for these people to come to visit and stay. Will the Secretary of State discuss with the Foreign Secretary what can be done to speed up applications for temporary visits to the UK following this tragedy?

I am very happy to undertake to talk to my right hon. Friend about this issue. It is one of the things that we will have to look at as a consequence of what has happened.

Many people, and not just those with Indian and Pakistani family backgrounds, will be grateful to my right hon. Friend for his words and the speed of his action. We know that many of the rural communities affected are extremely distant and that access to them is extremely difficult even under normal circumstances. Although it is early days, can a long-term plan be developed to make sure that the helicopters and air transport remain? With winter approaching and what we believe to be the destruction of residences, it will be a long time before people can be guaranteed to be adequately and properly secured from the effects of the winter elements.

My hon. Friend makes an important point. The main helicopter capacity, of course, comes from the Pakistan military, but the Americans have offered five Chinooks and three Black Hawks that will arrive today. The five Chinooks offer significant heavy-lift capability, and we saw in Indonesia that they will remain for as long as necessary to make sure that relief supplies are moved. At the same time, work continues to get the roads clear, but I know that access is difficult to the most remote communities. Together with the UN, we will continue to look at whether further helicopter support is required to ensure that relief supplies and other things that are needed for reconstruction can get to the most remote communities as they are accessed. However, we must recognise that some parts have not yet been reached by rescuers.

One in 10 of my constituents are from Pakistan or Kashmir, and they will have lost friends and relatives in this horror. Indeed, some of my constituents may be dead or injured. I spoke this morning to community leaders who asked me to thank the Secretary of State and the Department for what they are doing and to amplify the point that has just been made about help for rural communities. As he knows, communications in such areas is often extremely poor, and the people in them may be reached less speedily than those in more urban areas. Will he comment on that?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind words. The support that we are providing and that we will continue to provide, including through our response to the UN appeal when it is issued, is designed to try to ensure that we get support to all the areas affected. Clearly some of the towns are easier to reach in the first instance, but it is very important that the relief effort then spreads out into the countryside. Like many other Members, the hon. Gentleman knows that the geography is very difficult, but we just have to keep up the effort to make sure that help reaches all the people who need it.