House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee The future of the Welsh Regiments Oral and written evidence 5 July 2012 Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 5 July 2012 HC 372-i Session 2012-13 Published on 2 August 2013 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £6.00 The Welsh Affairs Committee The Welsh Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Office of the Secretary of State for Wales (including relations with the National Assembly for Wales). Current membership David T.C. Davies MP (Conservative, Monmouth) (Chair) Guto Bebb MP (Conservative, Aberconwy) Geraint Davies MP (Labour, Swansea West) Glyn Davies MP (Conservative, Montgomeryshire) Stephen Doughty MP (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth) Jonathan Edwards MP (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) Nia Griffith MP (Labour, Llanelli) Simon Hart MP (Conservative, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire) Mrs Siân C. James MP (Labour, Swansea East) Karen Lumley MP (Conservative, Redditch) Jessica Morden MP (Labour, Newport East) Mr Mark Williams MP (Liberal Democrat, Ceredigion) The following Members were also members of the Committee during this Parliament Stuart Andrews MP (Conservative, Pudsey) Alun Cairns MP (Conservative, Vale of Glamorgan) Susan Elan Jones MP (Labour, Clwyd South) Owen Smith MP (Labour, Pontypridd) Robin Walker MP (Conservative, Worcester) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/welshcom The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in printed volumes. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee is Marek Kubala (Clerk), Anwen Rees (Committee Specialist), Alison Mara (Senior Committee Assistant), Baris Tufekci (Committee Assistant), and Jessica Bridges-Palmer (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Welsh Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3264; and the Committee’s email address is [email protected] List of witnesses Thursday 5 July 2013 Page Professor Andrew Dorman, Professor in International Security, King’s College, London Ev 1 Colonel (retd) Timothy Wilson OBE, former member of 1st The Queen’s Dragoon Guards, and Major General (retd) Christopher Elliott CVO CBE, formerly Colonel of the Regiment of the Royal Regiment of Wales and Divisional Commandant of the Prince of Wales Division Ev 5 List of written evidence 1 National Express Group Wales & Borders Train Operating Company Ev 10 2 Michael Propert Lewis Ev 16 3 Antoinette Sandbach AM Ev 16 4 Letter from the Chair of the Welsh Affairs Committee to Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP, Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence Ev 17 5 Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence Ev 18 cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [01-08-2013 08:20] Job: 032253 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/032253/032253_o001_michelle_Corrected Transcript - FINAL.xml Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 1 Oral evidence Taken before the Welsh Affairs Committee on Thursday 5 July 2012 Members present: David T.C. Davies (Chair) Guto Bebb Jessica Morden Geraint Davies Mr Robin Walker Jonathan Edwards Mr Mark Williams Nia Griffith ________________ Examination of Witness Witness: Professor Andrew Dorman, Professor in International Security, King’s College, London, gave evidence. Q1 Chair: Good morning, Professor Dorman. Thank Q4 Geraint Davies: Can I ask how realistic you you very much indeed for coming along at fairly think the global reduction in numbers is in terms of short notice. an uncertain future? In particular, how likely is it, Professor Dorman: Thank you for inviting me. given the changes the Government are now making in employment tribunals—that small companies can get Q2 Chair: We may try and rattle through this rid of people they don’t like more easily—that people because, as I will explain to the next witnesses, I think will want to join the Territorial Army to prop up a everyone is going to want to try and be in or around one-legged army? the Chamber for 11.30 am to hear what the statement Professor Dorman: In terms of the numbers coming is, so this will be fairly short. down and whether it makes sense, given the economic Could I begin by asking you what the background is position, the Government have decided that the armed behind the Strategic Defence and Security Review? forces—Ministry of Defence—need to make a Professor Dorman: Certainly. There are three basic significant cut. If you look across Whitehall there is reasons why the coalition Government talked about an assumption that defence has not taken as significant having a Strategic Defence and Security Review. a cut as other Government Departments. I will leave Indeed, all the three main parties talked about having it for you to decide whether that is appropriate or not. a review in this Parliament. Looking at expenditure within defence, basically, The first one is—hopefully with the armed forces there are two things in the budget: equipment and coming out of the combat role in Afghanistan—what people. If you want to get new equipment you need to happens to the armed forces post-Afghanistan? What reduce overall personnel costs. One way of reducing type of armed forces do we need? Second is the personnel costs is to cut lots of people. That is one of argument as to where UK defence and security policy the things you are seeing, reducing the costs of needs to go. There hasn’t been a really major defence personnel and, to a degree, some reductions in review since the 1998 Strategic Defence Review and equipment capabilities. That is the only way to do we have had 9/11 and a whole series of issues since that. then. Which direction should defence and security policy follow? The third is the economic situation in Q5 Chair: Am I right in thinking that we are likely which the Ministry of Defence and the Government to rely much more on equipment than on manpower, found themselves that drove them towards making and that is a trend that has been going on for some significant cuts. years now, in a sort of high-tech first-world army? Professor Dorman: Since the end of the second world Q3 Chair: Could you tell us why the Army is war, we have seen, in most western forces—if you suffering a bigger reduction in manpower than any of think of NATO forces—a qualitative rather than a the other two services? quantitative emphasis: that we would always have a Professor Dorman: Proportionally, it is not technological lead offset by having a reduced number particularly suffering. What we are seeing is a longer of personnel, so we would have fewer people but more period to undertake the cuts, the reason being that, and better equipment. That has been a tradition we under the original 2010 SDSR, the Army was only have been following for more than half a century now. going to be reduced to 90,000 by 2020. The reductions Whether we will be able to maintain that were slower so as to support the war in Afghanistan. technological lead is subject to much discussion and The Navy and the Air Force could take their cuts debate because we have not invested masses in earlier. With the three-month review that Liam Fox research and development recently. We might lose that undertook last year, the Army cuts are going further technological lead, but all three services are down than that. However, if you look at the overall emphasising that they want to try and maximise their numbers, the Navy and the Air Force have both taken technological superiority as much as possible at the significant cuts in personnel. expense of personnel. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [01-08-2013 08:20] Job: 032253 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/032253/032253_o001_michelle_Corrected Transcript - FINAL.xml Ev 2 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence 5 July 2012 Professor Andrew Dorman Chair: Thank you very much. I am sorry, I cut across to do that, in terms of regimental amalgamation, will you a little bit there, Geraint. be seen in an hour or so. Q6 Geraint Davies: I wanted to know whether you Q9 Guto Bebb: To clarify, are you concerned that thought it was realistic that we would make up the political pressure might result in a settlement which is numbers from people coming forward, given that not what the Army was looking for in the first there is uncertainty in the employment markets and instance? people are more insecure. Professor Dorman: I am concerned that it might not Professor Dorman: It is difficult. Personnel numbers get it. Historically, and in previous reviews and and recruitment are always a challenge. At the reorganisations of the Army, there has always been a moment, recruitment is not much of a problem for the bias to certain countries within the United Kingdom. armed forces. Ironically enough, whenever there is a If you look at the current structure of the Army, in war, recruitment goes up. People seem to want to join terms of, for example, its infantry battalions, it does the armed forces when there is a war, for various not represent all four nations of the United Kingdom reasons.