(LD):...This
debate comes closely behind a debate in the other place on the
UK’s amphibious capability, which took place on 21 November, and
the debate on UK defences in this House on 23 November. They were
both excellent debates and ably moved, first, by the Member for
Stoke-on-Trent North and, secondly, by the noble Lord, . Many Peers and Members of
the other place rightly described the increasing threats not only
to our security but to that of our allies and the overseas
territories for which we are responsible. Many drew attention to
the importance to us, as a maritime nation that relies so heavily
on trade moving by sea, of having an effective Royal Navy and
Royal Marines. Furthermore, the financial predicament of the
Ministry of Defence was described in detail in both
debates...
(Con):...I congratulate the noble Lord, , on calling the debate
and on expounding the position of the maritime forces,
specifically the Royal Marines. Perforce I will not take up too
much of the House’s time, but I ask these questions of the House
and indeed the Government: what are our ambitions in defence? Do
we wish to be able to defend our trading interests? Do we wish to
be able to defend our overseas territories or indeed to
help them in humanitarian operations, as we have just heard, or
do we want to retreat behind the Channel? Do we wish to remain a
permanent member of the United Nations Security Council? Do we
wish to be regarded as a serious player in NATO? Do we wish to
punch above our weight? This is the nation of Drake, Raleigh,
Nelson, and Fisher. Do we want to be
a serious player in maritime and world affairs?
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
