Dai Havard: At the same time.
Dai Havard: Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
Dai Havard: The Defence Committee produced a report in 2009 after we visited Russia because of the Georgian conflict and we made recommendations then. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree, on the basis of reports from his own Committee and others, that as a Parliament we do not properly debate the recommendations that we advise it to discuss?
Dai Havard: The hon. Gentleman is making an important point. The Defence Committee in reports in this Parliament and the previous Parliament has talked about the MOD devoting 2% of the money that it has to S and T as well as R and D so that such spending is structured into budgets.
Dai Havard: May I take the right hon. and learned Gentleman back a little to the defence and security review? We can have a defence review and we can have a security review, or we can have an integrated process that looks at the whole business of future resilience, which I think is what he is suggesting we have not done and are not doing now. Does he think that when the new Parliament forms, the...
Dai Havard: I would guess that many hon. Members will make contributions about the symbolism of the 2% target and its relationship with foreign policy and so on. I will try to restrict my remarks to its utility: the purpose for it, the benefits of having the process, and some predictions—guesses may be a better word—and advice on what we might do. The 2% of GDP NATO target can be defined in all sorts...
Dai Havard: Obviously, yes, we will continue to need them. I am trying to make the point that this became the process, rather than the exception to the process—it should be the exception—and the money came out of the contingency fund, not the core budget. The budget should be 2%. As hon. Members might remember, when Labour was in Government and people said, “You should give more money to...
Dai Havard: Thank you very much. Thank you also to those in the Public Gallery. This is the last time that I will chair Westminster Hall, so it is appropriate that we have discussed the future. The Panel of Chairs has been helping with related matters, so I thank those present for helping us to establish a netiquette—I think that is the word—for the future, in which the public can be involved. The...
Dai Havard: The two Front Benchers will speak next. Could I ask you to share the time, please, so that Ms Hillier can have couple of minutes at the end to summarise and talk about what might come through in future? Thank you.
Dai Havard: Before we begin, I have a statement to make on behalf of Mr Speaker and the Chairman of Ways and Means. They have agreed, for the purposes of this debate only, that the public will be allowed to use electronic devices in the Public Gallery, provided that they do so silently and in a way that does not disrupt proceedings. That means that the same rules apply as apply to Members—so we will...
Dai Havard: Before I call Mr Halfon, I would just like to say that I have a copy of Erskine May here. I am not sure whether it is meant to be a weapons system that I can throw at you if you are disorderly. It looks as though it has never been opened, although I can see that it has been, because there are markers at the page dealing with the maintenance of order during a debate—I think that that is...
Dai Havard: My hon. Friend was a signatory to the 2003 report that followed the Deepcut barracks incidents, when the Committee started work on such a system. I pay tribute to him and other Committee members who have worked consistently to get to this situation, and I am sure that the next Committee will be equally diligent in ensuring we go further. Would he agree?
Dai Havard: With this it will be convenient to discuss schedule stand part.
Dai Havard: I now intend to let Mr Blackman speak. We will then have the two Front-Bench spokesmen. I will give Mr Hollobone some time at the end to wind up.
Dai Havard: Order. To give hon. Members a little advice before we continue, when we vote it will be on a motion to say that we have considered the petition, not that we necessarily agree or disagree with it. Mr Freer is itching to go in trap one.
Dai Havard: Four Members wish to speak and I want to start the Front-Bench wind-ups by 6.55, leaving them a goodly time to reply. Will Members restrain themselves to about seven minutes each, so that they may all get in?
Dai Havard: Order. I remind Members that interventions are meant to be short, concise and cogent.
Dai Havard: I call Liz McInnes.
Dai Havard: Order. May I just say that you are not a Front-Bench spokesperson—are you?
Dai Havard: Exactly. I am trying to be helpful to you in terms of convention; I am not trying to be difficult. Normally, you would sit in a seat for a normal Member and speak from there.