1-20 of 27 results for subject:Defence
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.235 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.007 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Defence
- We searched for
- subject_t:Defence OR subject_t:"National defence" OR subject_ses:90842
Answering member
X
Lord Davies of Oldham
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
More
Davies of Oldham, Lord (27)
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Lords motion to take note of the Spending Round 2019. Agreed to on question. (Part 1 of 2).
Lords motion to take note of the Spending Round 2019. Agreed to on question. (Part 1 of 2).
Lead member
Lord Duncan of Springbank
Answering member
Lord Davies of Oldham
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates
Subjects
Defence; Capital investment; Development aid; Diplomatic service; Housing; Education; Infrastructure; NHS; Police; Local government finance; Prisons; Public expenditure; Mental health services; Social services
Date
25 September 2019
Reference
799 cc1439-1464
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Lords motion to take note of the Spending Round 2019. Agreed to on question. (Part 2 of 2).
Lords motion to take note of the Spending Round 2019. Agreed to on question. (Part 2 of 2).
Lead member
Lord Duncan of Springbank
Answering member
Lord Davies of Oldham
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates
Subjects
Defence; Capital investment; Development aid; Diplomatic service; Housing; Education; Infrastructure; NHS; Police; Local government finance; Prisons; Public expenditure; Mental health services; Social services
Date
25 September 2019
Reference
799 cc1491-1508
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Lords motion to take note of the economy in the light of the Budget Statement. Agreed to on question.
Lords motion to take note of the economy in the light of the Budget Statement. Agreed to on question.
Lead member
Lord Bates
Answering member
Lord Davies of Oldham
Department
Treasury
Type
Debates
Subjects
Defence; Business; Corporation tax; Apprentices; Capital allowances; Borrowing; Broadband; Digital technology; Housing; Finance; Fees and charges; Environment protection; Income tax; Infrastructure; Gaming machines; Fiscal policy; Economic situation; Economic policy; Economic growth; NHS; Police; Workplace pensions; National insurance contributions; Public expenditure; Business rates; Probate; Universal credit; Research; Public sector debt; Plastics; Schools; Training; Tax allowances; Taxation; Retail trade; Public finance; Brexit; Stamp duty land tax; Productivity; Living wage; Budget October 2018; Apprenticeship levy
Date
13 November 2018
Reference
793 cc1792-1867
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many directions for exclusions and restrictions have been made under Section 28 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in each year since the provision came into force; and how many were made for an indefinite period.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many directions for exclusions and restrictions have been made under Section 28 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in each year since the provision came into force; and how many were made for an indefinite period.
Asked by
Lord Greaves
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 February 2010
The figures year by year for directions made to exclude access for defence or national security reasons under Section 28 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 are as follows:
These were all made for an indefinite period.
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 to date |
| 15 | 14 | nil | nil | nil | Nil | nil |
Legislation
Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000
Subjects
Access; Defence; Countryside; Exemptions; National security
Date
24 February 2010
Reference
2026; 717 c299-300WA
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I apologise; I was clearly eager to respond positively to the noble Lord. The 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review set out the Government’s priorities and spending plans for the years to 2010-11. These plans are fixed and will not be reopened. Planned spending on defence will rise from £32.6 billion in 2007-08 to a total budget of £36.9 billion by 2010-11, demonstrating the Government’s continued commitment to the Armed Forces. The budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will rise also, from £1.6 billion to £1.7 billion in the same period.
My Lords, I apologise; I was clearly eager to respond positively to the noble Lord. The 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review set out the Government’s priorities and spending plans for the years to 2010-11. These plans are fixed and will not be reopened. Planned spending on defence will rise from £32.6 billion in 2007-08 to a total budget of £36.9 billion by 2010-11, demonstrating the Government’s continued commitment to the Armed Forces. The budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will rise also, from £1.6 billion to £1.7 billion in the same period.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will reconsider the allocations for three years to the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development rising from £5.4 billion to £7.9 billion to alleviate concern as to the availability of requisite funding for the Armed Forces and counterterrorism.
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c8-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the Government agree that expenditure must be used to its maximum effect; that is why this defence expenditure provides two new aircraft carriers for the Navy, protected vehicles for the Army and additional air transport capability for the Royal Air Force—as well as, within the Foreign Office budget, increasing expenditure that will help in broader counterterrorism activities. These points were, of course, debated and taken into account before the spending plans were decided upon last year.
My Lords, the Government agree that expenditure must be used to its maximum effect; that is why this defence expenditure provides two new aircraft carriers for the Navy, protected vehicles for the Army and additional air transport capability for the Royal Air Force—as well as, within the Foreign Office budget, increasing expenditure that will help in broader counterterrorism activities. These points were, of course, debated and taken into account before the spending plans were decided upon last year.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his response and respectfully ask if he is aware that this does not address the concerns of Sir Richard Mottram, the former Permanent Secretary at the MoD, chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee and co-ordinator of government intelligence and security? The Times reported on 30 December that he said in his Demos lecture that DfID expenditure should be used to its ““maximum effect”” on defence and counterterrorism.
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will reconsider the allocations for three years to the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development rising from £5.4 billion to £7.9 billion to alleviate concern as to the availability of requisite funding for the Armed Forces and counterterrorism.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will reconsider the allocations for three years to the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development rising from £5.4 billion to £7.9 billion to alleviate concern as to the availability of requisite funding for the Armed Forces and counterterrorism.
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
21 January 2008
Answered on
21 January 2008
My Lords, I apologise; I was clearly eager to respond positively to the noble Lord. The 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review set out the Government’s priorities and spending plans for the years to 2010-11. These plans are fixed and will not be reopened. Planned spending on defence will rise from £32.6 billion in 2007-08 to a total budget of £36.9 billion by 2010-11, demonstrating the Government’s continued commitment to the Armed Forces. The budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will rise also, from £1.6 billion to £1.7 billion in the same period.
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c8-9
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, as I indicated in my Answer, there is increased expenditure on the Foreign Office’s budget, but its priorities change significantly from time to time and the noble Lord will recognise that there is an immense need to increase our capacity, ability and representation in the Middle East in areas where we are all too well aware that real difficulties manifest themselves. He will, no doubt, have heard this morning the extremely able way in which our ambassador to Afghanistan responded to the issues confronting the Government there, reflecting the enhanced status of his role in the country—a properly enhanced status, given the significance of Afghanistan to world security.
My Lords, as I indicated in my Answer, there is increased expenditure on the Foreign Office’s budget, but its priorities change significantly from time to time and the noble Lord will recognise that there is an immense need to increase our capacity, ability and representation in the Middle East in areas where we are all too well aware that real difficulties manifest themselves. He will, no doubt, have heard this morning the extremely able way in which our ambassador to Afghanistan responded to the issues confronting the Government there, reflecting the enhanced status of his role in the country—a properly enhanced status, given the significance of Afghanistan to world security.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Blaker
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary said two weeks ago that one-third of our diplomats in Europe are to be moved to the Middle East and Asia? While there may be a need for more in the Middle East and Asia, given the troubles there, is it not doubtful wisdom to reduce our diplomats in Europe by one-third?
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I do not think that defence spending has fallen below that of 1930; it is massively above the spending of the Conservative Government’s last decade in power—the late 1980s and early 1990s. The simple fact is that defence expenditure is falling, if the noble Baroness meant in relation to the rise in GDP, first, because the rise in GDP is proceeding significantly, and secondly, our percentage drop against GDP is in line with all other advanced countries, including the United States of America.
My Lords, I do not think that defence spending has fallen below that of 1930; it is massively above the spending of the Conservative Government’s last decade in power—the late 1980s and early 1990s. The simple fact is that defence expenditure is falling, if the noble Baroness meant in relation to the rise in GDP, first, because the rise in GDP is proceeding significantly, and secondly, our percentage drop against GDP is in line with all other advanced countries, including the United States of America.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Baroness Noakes
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, can the Minister explain why the Government have let defence spending fall to its lowest level since 1930, as a percentage of GDP?
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I apologise on behalf of my noble friend the Chief Whip for intervening on the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, for the second time today between the two of us.
The noble Lord is right: defence expenditure is bound to be a very high priority. He will appreciate that we need to guarantee the security of our country in troubled times. He will also recognise that we have provided in the budget additional resources for the period up to 2010-11.
My Lords, I apologise on behalf of my noble friend the Chief Whip for intervening on the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Alloway, for the second time today between the two of us.
The noble Lord is right: defence expenditure is bound to be a very high priority. He will appreciate that we need to guarantee the security of our country in troubled times. He will also recognise that we have provided in the budget additional resources for the period up to 2010-11.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Campbell of Alloway
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, can the noble Lord assure us that adequate provision of resources for our Armed Forces, for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in this respect, and for counterterrorism will remain a priority over other expenditures?
Subjects
Crime prevention; Armed forces; Defence; Department for International Development; Expenditure; Public expenditure; Ministry of Defence; Terrorism; Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Date
21 January 2008
Reference
698 c10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord acknowledges that under a Labour Government there has been a real growth in defence expenditure during the past 10 years. The simple explanation for his misunderstanding of the position is as follows: the defence budget has been at the level that he stated, but I answered last time on defence expenditure, which includes military operations.
My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord acknowledges that under a Labour Government there has been a real growth in defence expenditure during the past 10 years. The simple explanation for his misunderstanding of the position is as follows: the defence budget has been at the level that he stated, but I answered last time on defence expenditure, which includes military operations.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Earl Attlee
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that rather surprising reply, but since the GDP cake has been growing by 2.5 per cent per year since 1992 and the defence slice of that cake has been growing by only about 1.5 per cent, was not your Lordships’ Defence Minister surely right?
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1202
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the first base is the Comprehensive Spending Review, which will culminate in the middle of this year. Defence expenditure and the defence budget for the next three years will be included in that. However, the Government of course take into account changes in priorities in the longer term. This is all part of the work that is done together by the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence.
My Lords, the first base is the Comprehensive Spending Review, which will culminate in the middle of this year. Defence expenditure and the defence budget for the next three years will be included in that. However, the Government of course take into account changes in priorities in the longer term. This is all part of the work that is done together by the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Garden
(Liberal Democrat)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, while I recognise the slight increase in real terms in the defence budget, the tasking, too, has increased significantly during this period. The National Audit Office recognised that in its report and the Prime Minister said in Plymouth that it would mean the need for long-term extra expenditure. Will the Minister confirm that the Treasury is working with the Ministry of Defence on redefining and costing the defence planning assumptions?
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1202
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
But, my Lords, the noble Lord is asking his question in a different context. I was replying last week in a context in which it was contended that defence expenditure was being cut. I said that it was not, and it is not.
But, my Lords, the noble Lord is asking his question in a different context. I was replying last week in a context in which it was contended that defence expenditure was being cut. I said that it was not, and it is not.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Tebbit
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I do not know whether the Minister feels that he has yet understood the questions. Surely he will agree that a Government who saw the end of the Cold War were able to reduce defence expenditure, and a Government who involved our Armed Forces in only one relatively minor overseas war were able to contain defence expenditure. Does he not realise that the Government of which he is a member will probably go down as the most warmongering since the end of the Second World War? That is why defence expenditure ought to be far higher than it is today.
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1203
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the issue is not that the Treasury produces these statistics; the noble Lord who asked the Question called for the statistics. This derived from a Question about defence last week. I am, therefore, obliged to put the record straight. However, I recognise what the noble Lord says: of course it is important that we sustain defence expenditure to meet the commitments of our troops. It is quite clear that the extra cost of military operations reflects the deployment of our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the noble Lord will recognise that that involves substantial increased expenditure.
My Lords, the issue is not that the Treasury produces these statistics; the noble Lord who asked the Question called for the statistics. This derived from a Question about defence last week. I am, therefore, obliged to put the record straight. However, I recognise what the noble Lord says: of course it is important that we sustain defence expenditure to meet the commitments of our troops. It is quite clear that the extra cost of military operations reflects the deployment of our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the noble Lord will recognise that that involves substantial increased expenditure.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord King of Bridgwater
(Conservative)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, does the Minister recognise that, as the noble Lord, Lord Garden, said, it is also a question of commitments? I do not think that many of those serving in the forces will be impressed by the bandying around of statistics or the clever answers coming from the Treasury Bench, given that those forces are faced with shortages, increasing levels of commitment and an increasing abandonment of the harmony guidelines, which provide a decent interval between unaccompanied tours of duty. The Prime Minister’s comments in Plymouth, belated though they were, were at last a recognition of the serious shortfall in defence expenditure.
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1203
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, we had a reduction in defence expenditure against GDP over the decade before we came to power. Since 1997, we have been spending on defence 2.5 per cent of GDP, which is almost exactly the same as the percentage rise in GDP.
My Lords, we had a reduction in defence expenditure against GDP over the decade before we came to power. Since 1997, we have been spending on defence 2.5 per cent of GDP, which is almost exactly the same as the percentage rise in GDP.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, was not the Minister being unduly modest in his reply? Has not GDP been rising rapidly? Is not the fact that defence expenditure has stayed at the same percentage of GDP therefore really quite remarkable?
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1203
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, the totality of defence spending as a percentage of GDP, as published in the Pre-Budget Report national expenditure statistical analysis of 6 December 2006, has remained roughly constant since 1997 at 2.5 per cent.
My Lords, the totality of defence spending as a percentage of GDP, as published in the Pre-Budget Report national expenditure statistical analysis of 6 December 2006, has remained roughly constant since 1997 at 2.5 per cent.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1202
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Why, in light of Lord Drayson’s statement on5 July 2006 (Official Report, col. 229) that defence expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product had reduced, Lord Davies of Oldham stated on 17 January (Official Report , col. 649) that the Government had not reduced the percentage.
Why, in light of Lord Drayson’s statement on5 July 2006 (Official Report, col. 229) that defence expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product had reduced, Lord Davies of Oldham stated on 17 January (Official Report , col. 649) that the Government had not reduced the percentage.
Asked by
Earl Attlee
(Conservative)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
25 January 2007
Answered on
25 January 2007
My Lords, the totality of defence spending as a percentage of GDP, as published in the Pre-Budget Report national expenditure statistical analysis of 6 December 2006, has remained roughly constant since 1997 at 2.5 per cent.
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
25 January 2007
Reference
688 c1202
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Whether, following the speech made by the Prime Minister in Plymouth on 12 January, they propose significant increases in defence spending.
Whether, following the speech made by the Prime Minister in Plymouth on 12 January, they propose significant increases in defence spending.
Asked by
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
(Liberal Democrat)
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Procedure
Topical questions (HL)
For answer on
17 January 2007
Answered on
17 January 2007
My Lords, departmental expenditure limits for 2008-09 to 2010-11 will be set in the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
17 January 2007
Reference
688 c647
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, departmental expenditure limits for 2008-09 to 2010-11 will be set in the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.
My Lords, departmental expenditure limits for 2008-09 to 2010-11 will be set in the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
(Liberal Democrat)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Whether, following the speech made by the Prime Minister in Plymouth on 12 January, they propose significant increases in defence spending.
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
17 January 2007
Reference
688 c647
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord that every Member of the House would benefit from reading the Prime Minister’s speech, but the interpretation that they would give it would be rather different from that which the noble Lord has indicated. We are in the process of establishing defence expenditure for the next three years, as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review. Our projections beyond that will be made at a later stage, but there will be a number of contributions to that debate. The Prime Minister’s contribution will, of course, be regarded very seriously and very importantly indeed.
My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord that every Member of the House would benefit from reading the Prime Minister’s speech, but the interpretation that they would give it would be rather different from that which the noble Lord has indicated. We are in the process of establishing defence expenditure for the next three years, as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review. Our projections beyond that will be made at a later stage, but there will be a number of contributions to that debate. The Prime Minister’s contribution will, of course, be regarded very seriously and very importantly indeed.
Answered by
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
(Liberal Democrat)
Type
Oral answers to questions
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that holding reply. I hope that he will agree that the Prime Minister’s speech in Plymouth should be recommended reading for all Members of this House. The Prime Minister buys into the neo-conservative view of world politics; he talks about a long war against a single enemy—all the mistakes that the Americans make on global terrorism. However, he stated very clearly: "““For our part, in Government, it will mean increased expenditure on equipment, personnel and the conditions of our Armed Forces; not in the short run, but for the long term””."
Is that not a clear Prime Ministerial pledge for a significant and sustained increase in defence expenditure?
Subjects
Defence; Expenditure
Date
17 January 2007
Reference
688 c647
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords