1-20 of 34 results for subject:Defence
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.269 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.005 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Defence
- We searched for
- subject_t:Defence OR subject_t:"National defence" OR subject_ses:90842
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what proportion of the projected increase in defence expenditure during the current Parliament his Department expects to spend on (a) equipment and (b) the maintenance of equipment.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what proportion of the projected increase in defence expenditure during the current Parliament his Department expects to spend on (a) equipment and (b) the maintenance of equipment.
As a result of the increase in the Defence Budget following the Spending Round, the rigorous efficiency programme being pursued by the Ministry of Defence and the uplift from the Joint Security Fund, our planned spend on equipment acquisition and support has risen from £166 billion to £178 billion over the ten years of the forward programme. The annual breakdown of the Equipment Plan 2016 will be published in the autumn and will detail the expenditure over this Parliament.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department is taking steps to increase the proportion of defence spending that goes to small firms.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department is taking steps to increase the proportion of defence spending that goes to small firms.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) recognises that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are a crucial engine for growth and innovation in this country. In 2014-15, the MOD spent almost £4 billion both directly and indirectly with SMEs, equating to around 19.4 per cent of our procurement spend.
We are taking steps to increase the proportion of defence spending with smaller companies and have committed to ensuring that 25 per cent of our procurement spend, both direct and indirect, is with SMEs by 2020. To help achieve this challenging goal, the MOD last month refreshed its SME policy, reflecting three core objectives:
- Engaging throughout the supply chain, not just with direct contractors;
- Reducing bureaucracy associated with procurement; and
- Making engagement more simple and straightforward.
The refreshed SME policy can be found on gov.uk at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/mod-policy-for-small-and-medium-enterprises.
What estimate he has made of the likely change in the level of defence spending over the course of this Parliament.
What estimate he has made of the likely change in the level of defence spending over the course of this Parliament.
As from this month, the Ministry of Defence’s budget has risen to more than £35 billion—that is an increase of £800 million on the year just ended. This is the first real-terms increase in six years, reflecting the priority set out by this Government in the 2015 spending review to increase defence spending by 0.5% above inflation every year to 2020-21. This Government have clearly committed this country to meeting the NATO guideline of spending 2% of GDP on defence each and every year of this decade.
What recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in other NATO countries on spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
What recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in other NATO countries on spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
The UK is proud to be one of five NATO countries that meet the commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Since the defence investment pledge was made at the Wales summit in 2014, progress has been made, with 16 allies increasing defence spending in real terms and 24 allies now spending more of their defence budgets on equipment. As it happens, the leadership role that the UK is given in NATO on this issue was warmly welcomed once again by the US Deputy Defence Secretary in my bilateral discussions with him last Friday.
As from this month, the Ministry of Defence’s budget has risen to more than £35 billion—that is an increase of £800 million on the year just ended. This is the first real-terms increase in six years, reflecting the priority set out by this Government in the 2015 spending review to increase defence spending by 0.5% above inflation every year to 2020-21. This Government have clearly committed this country to meeting the NATO guideline of spending 2% of GDP on defence each and every year of this decade.
As from this month, the Ministry of Defence’s budget has risen to more than £35 billion—that is an increase of £800 million on the year just ended. This is the first real-terms increase in six years, reflecting the priority set out by this Government in the 2015 spending review to increase defence spending by 0.5% above inflation every year to 2020-21. This Government have clearly committed this country to meeting the NATO guideline of spending 2% of GDP on defence each and every year of this decade.
What estimate he has made of the likely change in the level of defence spending over the course of this Parliament.
My hon. Friend is right to identify that the threats we face are growing in scale, complexity and concurrency, and a failure to meet this commitment would have a significant adverse impact on our ability to deliver the capability we need to face those threats and would send a very wrong message to our adversaries. Our commitment to spending 2% of GDP on defence enables us to deliver one of the most capable armed forces in the world; to spend more than £178 billion on equipment and equipment support over the next decade; and to fund an increase in the number of regular personnel for both the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, and of reservists for the British Army.
My hon. Friend is right to identify that the threats we face are growing in scale, complexity and concurrency, and a failure to meet this commitment would have a significant adverse impact on our ability to deliver the capability we need to face those threats and would send a very wrong message to our adversaries. Our commitment to spending 2% of GDP on defence enables us to deliver one of the most capable armed forces in the world; to spend more than £178 billion on equipment and equipment support over the next decade; and to fund an increase in the number of regular personnel for both the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, and of reservists for the British Army.
I welcome this increased budget. If we were to adopt the position advocated by some and not spend 2%, what would the impact be on the morale of our troops, their equipment and our security?
The hon. Gentleman, in characteristic style, is looking for smoke where there is no fire. We use the NATO definition to make the calculation of our proportion of GDP spent on defence, and it assesses the figure and then publishes it. We have done that in the past under previous Administrations and we will do it again under this one.
The hon. Gentleman, in characteristic style, is looking for smoke where there is no fire. We use the NATO definition to make the calculation of our proportion of GDP spent on defence, and it assesses the figure and then publishes it. We have done that in the past under previous Administrations and we will do it again under this one.
But the Minister cannot pull the wool over our eyes on this one, because we all know that defence spending was set to fall below 2% of GDP, but for the Government including things that had never been included in the NATO analysis before, such as war pensions and the pension contributions of MOD civilian staff. Will he now come clean? Will he have to resort to these sorts of accounting gimmicks to be able to assure NATO that in future we will maintain 2% spending?
I thank my hon. Friend for giving me the chance to rehearse again our commitment to increased spending on defence and security for each and every year of this Parliament—that will be a real-terms increase. We have published our 10-year forward equipment plan, which shows the contribution that defence will be making to the prosperity of the nation—that is another objective we have taken on in the defence review for the first time. That will benefit both the security of our nation and the economy as a whole.
I thank my hon. Friend for giving me the chance to rehearse again our commitment to increased spending on defence and security for each and every year of this Parliament—that will be a real-terms increase. We have published our 10-year forward equipment plan, which shows the contribution that defence will be making to the prosperity of the nation—that is another objective we have taken on in the defence review for the first time. That will benefit both the security of our nation and the economy as a whole.
The Government’s defence review set out a £178 billion programme of investment in equipment for our armed forces over the next decade. Will the Minister ignore calls from the other parties to cut defence spending, which would mean smaller, weaker armed forces and the loss of highly skilled jobs in the defence sector?
The hon. Lady is very experienced in these matters, and she will know that, in 2010, the then coalition Government inherited a dire financial situation across the public sector, and especially in defence, and some very difficult decisions had to be taken to reduce certain front-line elements, including our aircraft carriers. She is also fully aware that we are in the midst of the largest shipbuilding programme that this country has ever known. Early next year, we expect to see the first of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers moved out of Rosyth to take up their position with the Royal Navy.
The hon. Lady is very experienced in these matters, and she will know that, in 2010, the then coalition Government inherited a dire financial situation across the public sector, and especially in defence, and some very difficult decisions had to be taken to reduce certain front-line elements, including our aircraft carriers. She is also fully aware that we are in the midst of the largest shipbuilding programme that this country has ever known. Early next year, we expect to see the first of the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers moved out of Rosyth to take up their position with the Royal Navy.
Despite the claims by the Minister’s Department, the reality is that, between 2010 and 2015, the Royal Navy has had a 33% decline in carriers and amphibious ships, a 17% decline in submarines and a 17% decline in destroyers and frigates. We are a maritime nation, and yet our Navy is declining. Is it not time that we placed greater investment in our maritime capabilities?
I thank my hon. Friend who, in a previous role, had responsibility for promoting defence exports. I also wish to say that I have even better news for him: the announcement last week of the sale of Typhoons to Kuwait was for not for 24 aircraft, but for 28.
I thank my hon. Friend who, in a previous role, had responsibility for promoting defence exports. I also wish to say that I have even better news for him: the announcement last week of the sale of Typhoons to Kuwait was for not for 24 aircraft, but for 28.
I proposed a private Member’s Bill last year requiring the Government to enshrine in law that we spend at least 2% of GDP on defence. May I welcome today’s announcement and hope that the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) is wrong and that this really does represent new money? May I also take this opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend on the important work that he has done, under the lead of the Prime Minister, in promoting defence exports, and to welcome the 24 Typhoons that have been sold to Kuwait and hope that that will contribute to the Ministry of Defence’s budget?
This Government have undertaken a new set of procurement guidelines for steel, which we have implemented through the Ministry of Defence through a combination of briefings to the Defence Suppliers Forum undertaken by the Secretary of State. I have also written to the chief executives of the 15 largest contractors. We are cascading that through the supply chain to ensure that, for future defence procurement, there is every opportunity for UK steel manufacturers to bid for tenders.
This Government have undertaken a new set of procurement guidelines for steel, which we have implemented through the Ministry of Defence through a combination of briefings to the Defence Suppliers Forum undertaken by the Secretary of State. I have also written to the chief executives of the 15 largest contractors. We are cascading that through the supply chain to ensure that, for future defence procurement, there is every opportunity for UK steel manufacturers to bid for tenders.
What defence spending can the Minister guarantee for the steel industry given that the procurement rules allow for community benefit?
The hon. Gentleman really needs to read those letters more carefully. The reduction to which he referred related to the in-year spending of the Department, which ended at the beginning of this month. The defence budget for the current year, and for each future year, is going up, and the question that he and his colleagues need to answer is this: why will his party not commit, as our party has, to the 2% NATO commitment?
The hon. Gentleman really needs to read those letters more carefully. The reduction to which he referred related to the in-year spending of the Department, which ended at the beginning of this month. The defence budget for the current year, and for each future year, is going up, and the question that he and his colleagues need to answer is this: why will his party not commit, as our party has, to the 2% NATO commitment?
Government Members appear to be insinuating that the Labour party is advocating a reduction in defence spending, which is entirely untrue. It is perhaps unfortunate that the hon. Member for Tamworth (Christopher Pincher) talked about the impact that defence cuts have on the morale of our armed forces, because I have here a letter from the Secretary of State confirming that the MOD agreed to make £500 million of in-year savings after the Budget this year. The Government, of which this Minister is a part, has overseen a 17% cut in those Royal Navy warships and now, for the first time since 1982, have left the Falklands without a Royal Navy frigate protecting it. Can he clarify the record that we have a Government who are cutting defence spending—massively in recent years—and leaving the nation less protected as a result of it?
The UK is proud to be one of five NATO countries that meet the commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Since the defence investment pledge was made at the Wales summit in 2014, progress has been made, with 16 allies increasing defence spending in real terms and 24 allies now spending more of their defence budgets on equipment. As it happens, the leadership role that the UK is given in NATO on this issue was warmly welcomed once again by the US Deputy Defence Secretary in my bilateral discussions with him last Friday.
The UK is proud to be one of five NATO countries that meet the commitment to spend 2% of GDP on defence. Since the defence investment pledge was made at the Wales summit in 2014, progress has been made, with 16 allies increasing defence spending in real terms and 24 allies now spending more of their defence budgets on equipment. As it happens, the leadership role that the UK is given in NATO on this issue was warmly welcomed once again by the US Deputy Defence Secretary in my bilateral discussions with him last Friday.
What recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in other NATO countries on spending two per cent of GDP on defence.
I am not sure that the Speaker will give me enough time to answer both those issues, so I will focus on the first, if I may. The NATO Secretary-General was here last week and he praised the United Kingdom for our leadership on defence spending and our contribution to NATO. By the NATO summit in Warsaw in July, we expect to see further progress on the part of our allies in working to meet NATO’s 2% guideline. By contrast, the deafening failure to match that commitment by the Labour party sends precisely the wrong message to our allies and, even worse, to our adversaries.
I am not sure that the Speaker will give me enough time to answer both those issues, so I will focus on the first, if I may. The NATO Secretary-General was here last week and he praised the United Kingdom for our leadership on defence spending and our contribution to NATO. By the NATO summit in Warsaw in July, we expect to see further progress on the part of our allies in working to meet NATO’s 2% guideline. By contrast, the deafening failure to match that commitment by the Labour party sends precisely the wrong message to our allies and, even worse, to our adversaries.
What signal would it send to our NATO partners, and to our adversaries, ahead of the Warsaw summit if the Government took the advice of some in the House and failed to commit to spending 2% of GDP on defence? Will my hon. Friend update the House on the Libya and wider middle east situation?
As I indicated earlier this afternoon, NATO makes the definition and assesses the contributions that are made by each member nation to its return. It is not for the United Kingdom to make that determination; it is for NATO to do so.
As I indicated earlier this afternoon, NATO makes the definition and assesses the contributions that are made by each member nation to its return. It is not for the United Kingdom to make that determination; it is for NATO to do so.
The Minister and many other hon. Members make much of this 2%, but 2% in the United Kingdom is quite different from a measurement of 2% for other NATO allies. Does the Minister not agree that this process of self-assessment, which NATO seems to tick off, has profound implications for the alliance’s method of calculation of GDP expenditure on the military?
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the annual maintenance spend by the (a) Royal Navy, (b) British Army and (c) Royal Air Force has been in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the annual maintenance spend by the (a) Royal Navy, (b) British Army and (c) Royal Air Force has been in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.
Annual maintenance spend, on equipment support and property management, is not recorded by individual arm of Service. This is because our Armed Services operate as integrated joint organisations in which the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force work together and share land, buildings, facilities and equipment.
Eleventh opposition day debate (part one), on a motion in the name of the Leader of the second largest opposition party (SNP). Main question negatived on division (64 to 330).
Eleventh opposition day debate (part one), on a motion in the name of the Leader of the second largest opposition party (SNP). Main question negatived on division (64 to 330).
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which category (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C projects are managed by (i) Navy Command, (ii) Army Command, (iii) Air Command, (iv) Joint Forces Command and (v) the Strategic Programmes Directorate.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, which category (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C projects are managed by (i) Navy Command, (ii) Army Command, (iii) Air Command, (iv) Joint Forces Command and (v) the Strategic Programmes Directorate.
This information is not held centrally and collating which individual category A, B, and C projects are managed by each of the Front-Line Commands would incur disproportionate cost.
Further information on equipment projects can be found in the published Defence Equipment Plan 2015 and Major Projects Authority Annual Report 2015, both of which can be found in the Library of the House.
The-Defence-Equipment-Plan-2015
Major-Projects-Authority-Annual-Report-2015
Motion that the House sit in private. Negatived on question. Second reading. Agreed to on question (16 to 1). Question was not decided because fewer than 40 Members had taken part in the Division.
Motion that the House sit in private. Negatived on question. Second reading. Agreed to on question (16 to 1). Question was not decided because fewer than 40 Members had taken part in the Division.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make an estimate of Chinese defence expenditure on a Purchasing Power Parity basis; and if he will make a statement.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make an estimate of Chinese defence expenditure on a Purchasing Power Parity basis; and if he will make a statement.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) annually publishes estimates of defence spending by the Top 15 World-wide military spenders. The MOD's Annual Statistical Series 1 Finance Bulletin 1.02 on International Defence published on 14 August 2014, (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/international-defence-expenditure-2014--2) estimates China's Defence Expenditure in 2013 to be US$275 billion based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) rates. This estimate is calculated from defence expenditure data published by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) data and PPP rates published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
On 8 October 2015 the MOD will publish updated estimates covering 2014, which will be based on the latest available SIPRI data.