Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Monday 19th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Louise Sandher-Jones]

As the hon. Lady will be aware, we co-operate across a number of measures via the EU, through NATO, and through bilateral agreements such as Lunna House with Norway and Trinity House with Germany. As well as that, we have the security and defence partnership, and we will continue to work through that on the opportunities that she described.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Defence Committee.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

It is clear from the lifting of US sanctions on Russia, reports of Starlink being slowed down and restricted, and President Trump’s recent Russia diesel deal that we, alongside our European allies, must step up to fill the void being left by the US. The path to peace on our continent will not be forged by sidelining Ukraine and rewarding Russian imperialism. What capabilities will now be given to Ukraine as a European alternative to ensure that President Zelensky is not further isolated?

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

May I commend the Government’s decision to stay out of the SAFE—Security Action for Europe—programme? It was going to be horrendously expensive, we would have got less money out than we would have put in, it was going to take the intellectual property of any participating company who offered a programme to it, and it was going to take far too long to build up any capability. Can we concentrate on NATO? Will the Minister advise the Liberal Democrats that defence in the EU is a reserved matter to the member states? Therefore, we are much better off co-operating through NATO, which is also much quicker than trying to do something with some European—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Sir Bernard, in fairness, I think you got in your first three questions.

[Louise Sandher-Jones]

I will not intrude in relations among those on the Opposition Benches, but I understand that the Liberal Democrats have heard the hon. Member’s point. As he knows, we are big believers in NATO first, not NATO only; I take his point.

--- Later in debate ---

[Wes Streeting]

There is no doubt that Russia presents a threat and is an adversary of the United States as well as of the United Kingdom. We see that with the company that Russia chooses to keep and with the risk that Russia poses to US interests and US personnel as well as our own in the way that it conducts itself. The United States has not been alone in buying fuel from Russia. We have had similar challenges here on the European continent in relation to Russian gas. The more that Putin’s war machine is funded, the longer this war goes on and the higher the price for everyone. That price is being paid most of all by the Ukrainians, who did not start this war and who lack the means to end it. Only Putin can do that. He could stop the war tomorrow; he chooses not to do so.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

Part of the growing threat from Russia—and it is growing —includes increased maritime activity, both in the English channel and in the surveillance of critically important undersea cables, including by specialist Russian submarines. Part of our response should surely be to increase our own submarine patrols around our shores. However, for many months, not a single one of our Astute class attack submarines has been on patrol. I know that it is not the Government’s policy to comment on submarine movements, but I am asking about the absence of submarine movements. Why, on Labour’s watch, have our attack submarines been embarrassingly tied up alongside for months at a time, while the Russians are roving in the North sea and the Atlantic?

[Wes Streeting]

However the shadow Minister phrases his question, he is not going to tempt me to comment on operational deployments. He understands perfectly well why we choose not to do that. Secondly, I point him to recent exercises we have conducted in the North sea and to our leadership of the joint expeditionary force. To go to the heart of his question about our armed forces and their readiness, perhaps the next time he or his party want to get to their feet to lecture us about the state of our armed forces, they might begin with an apology for underfunding them for more than a decade.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Bailey]

I welcome the question. Wales has a proud history of serving our country, and that results in an extension of the armed forces covenant in our schools. There is something there that we need to recognise in supporting our veterans and their children in schools in the Welsh system, so I will take a look at it.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)]

The Liberal Democrats have proposed expanding our cadet and reserve forces to include a voluntary civilian resilience strand, equipping British people with skills in cyber-defence, emergency response and protecting critical national infrastructure. Last week, the director general of MI5 warned of escalating Russian hybrid warfare and the need to strengthen our national resilience. The Defence Secretary will be aware that Britain once had a civil defence corps, with tens of thousands of volunteers during the cold war. Will he back our proposals to establish a new civilian volunteer reserve co-ordinated by a new, dedicated civil defence office, harnessing the enthusiasm of Britain’s young people who want to serve their communities and strengthen our national resilience?

[Mr Speaker]

That was shoehorned—I call the Minister.

[Mr Bailey]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Indeed, if the hon. Gentleman spent some time with our Royal Air Force cadets, he would see the amazing cyber-programme that they are rolling out, which will be expanded across the Army Cadets and the Sea and Royal Marine Cadets as part of the cadets action plan.

--- Later in debate ---

[Luke Pollard]

I thank my hon. Friend for that work. She will know that we have stood up the Defence Office for Small Business Growth, which is a dedicated front door for small businesses to access and navigate the defence procurement process and speed up security clearances and cyber essentials. She will also know that many companies that could benefit from it may not classify themselves as defence businesses; they may be a provider of a service or component that could make a big difference to defence as well. I look forward to making the case to her businesses that there is an easier way now to contract with defence which I hope will create more opportunities for those in the west midlands.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister. Welcome.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Boxer is vital to defence procurement across the west midlands, including for those constituents in Dudley who work at Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land. The MOD has now confirmed that earlier this year it cut nearly £2 billion from the £7 billion allocated to the mechanised infantry programme—a cut that included three new variants for the Army, including the critical repair and recovery variant. What will the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers light aid detachments be equipped with, given that there is no longer a plan to procure those vehicles, and how will the Army repair and recover damaged Boxer vehicles without a repair and recovery variant?

--- Later in debate ---

[Louise Sandher-Jones]

The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight the importance of our icebreaking capability. Project Shackleton is looking at the longer-term options for the capability.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)]

I was pleased to see the Defence Readiness and Industry Minister welcoming HMS Protector home to Devonport, although judging by the three tugboats, I suspect she was rather less enthusiastic about the reunion than he was. With growing Russian activity in the High North and renewed chest beating from Argentina over the Falklands, Britain’s only naval ice patrol ship faces an uncertain future. How can a single replacement sustain a credible presence at both poles, while allowing for maintenance and refits, and how will the Minister prevent a gap in capability?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)]

13. What steps he is taking to improve defence preparedness and resilience.

[Mr Speaker]

Question 13—unlucky for some!

[The Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry (Luke Pollard)]

This Government have ended the underfunding and hollowing out of our armed forces that we inherited from the last Government. We are getting ready for warfighting readiness by 2030. That is why we are directing more of a growing defence budget at British companies, retiring old equipment, and giving our brilliant men and women in the armed forces the latest kit. Defence spending is up, morale is up and recruitment is up.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Veterans and People (Mr Calvin Bailey)]

We are rapidly improving defence housing; we have already upgraded 1,250 homes, with a further 1,000 brought back into use this year. We have introduced customer commitments for service families, including clear pledges on housing standards, customer service and listening to families’ experiences. I will find the time to meet those people who live in service housing in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[James Cartlidge (South Suffolk) (Con)]

As it is the first time we have debated, may I begin by welcoming the new Secretary of State to his position? On 26 July, he appeared on the Camilla Tominey show on GB News and was asked, “If the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not stump up enough defence spending, will he resign?” The Secretary of State replied, “Absolutely.” Is that still the case?

--- Later in debate ---

[Wes Streeting]

I can give my hon. Friend an assurance on that. I can also reassure him that over the weekend, I was in contact with both the Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, in the United States and Defence Minister Yevhenii Khmara in Ukraine to try to improve the coverage and the capability of that intelligence.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

For all intents and purposes, Diego Garcia is an American military base, but the Government claim that to protect it, we must basically sell it to Mauritius at vast cost. There is one country in the world that does not acknowledge the International Court of Justice: the United States. Why do we not create a virtuous circle and sell the base to President Trump for £6 billion, and use that £6 billion to start the process of raising our defence spending to 3% of GDP by 2030?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Calvin Bailey]

As a proud east Londoner, I learned as a child about the Woolwich Canaries, and the difficult conditions to which they were exposed in support of our war effort and to keep our armed forces equipped. The contribution of the Canary Girls, along with that of all civilian and military women, is recognised on the “Women of World War II” memorial in Whitehall. Because the responsibility for matters involving civilian wartime workers sits outside the Ministry of Defence, I direct my hon. Friend to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, but as an east London MP who knows very well of the great sacrifices of the Canaries, I would like to meet her and support her campaign.

[Mr Speaker]

Nowhere were those sacrifices greater than in Chorley. I call Sir Roger Gale.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

Mr. Trump’s disgraceful show of support for Putin has clearly raised the stakes, not only in Ukraine but in the Baltic states and Poland. Given the perfidious nature of the current incumbent of the White House, will the Secretary of State reaffirm our commitment to NATO, and indicate very clearly that an attack on one NATO state is an attack on all of us, and that this country stands by its friends?