Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Defence

Oral Answers to Questions

Gordon Henderson Excerpts
Monday 14th March 2011

(13 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Liam Fox Portrait Dr Fox
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

If we have financial difficulties in the MOD or elsewhere in the Government, we know where they came from. When we look across what we do in the Ministry of Defence—and, indeed, in the rest of Government —we look to see what risks the UK may face and how we might best mitigate them. We have decided that the United Kingdom needs an adaptable posture, and we have therefore decided to build flexibility into the programmes leading to Future Force 2020, which I believe provides the best security for this country.

Gordon Henderson Portrait Gordon Henderson (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Con)
- Hansard - -

14. If he will assess the merits of placing currently unrequired defence equipment in reserve.

Peter Luff Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Peter Luff)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A wide range of options are routinely considered for all defence equipment that is not required for operational use. They include extended readiness, long-term preservation, sale and disposal. In relation to preservation, we take into account factors such as the threats against which regeneration of the capability would be predicated; the cost and practicality of preservation arrangements, which may be significant; and the lead time and costs for ensuring that suitably trained personnel could be made available to operate the equipment.

Gordon Henderson Portrait Gordon Henderson
- Hansard - -

I welcome the Minister’s answer, but I am a bit concerned about cost. The shipping industry often lays up ships at minimal cost for a number of years, using small maintenance teams and dehumidifiers. Given recent events in north Africa, does my hon. Friend agree that keeping Britain’s reserve defences strong enough to meet unexpected challenges ought to be a priority, especially if it can be done at minimal cost to the taxpayer?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Nothing would give me and my ministerial colleagues more pleasure than to be able to keep all decommissioned equipment in storage, but we can do so only when it makes sense financially and strategically. Sadly, it is not as simple as switching off the engine and placing the kit in an air-conditioned environment. We need to be able to maintain the equipment, retain and maintain stores, have personnel trained to use it and—something my hon. Friend may not be aware of—pay the cost of capital needed to hold it in reserve. Sadly, it is more complicated in the MOD than it is in the private sector.