more … ]]> Commenting following the publication of the Scottish Government’s consultation paper on a 2014 referendum on independence, North East Fife MP Sir Menzies Campbell said:

“The constitutional battle has been joined.

“Now that the date for the referendum has been set the whole country needs to get down to a serious debate about Scotland’s future. It should be characterised by integrity and good temper. To review the constitutional arrangements of the last 300 years is an awesome task in which those of us of today have an enormous responsibility for generations to come.

“If Scotland wants to go down the road towards separation the implications not only for us but for the other countries that make up the UK are huge. This would be a momentous decision with little possibility of re-tracing our steps. My own position is clear. I believe that Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England are the stronger for their union and I shall be campaigning for this.”

more … ]]> Sir Menzies Campbell MP has questioned at what point Alex Salmond’s vision for the scope and scale of an independent Scotland’s Armed Forces became established SNP policy.

His calls come after the SNP’s own Defence spokesperson Angus Robertson said last year, that one air base would be “totally unacceptable” in Scotland, and the First Minister presented himself as a defender of communities faced with the closure of their local military base.

However the SNP’s own plans are now significantly below the proposals contained in the Defence Review which the First Minister challenged vehemently at the time as being a bad deal for Scotland.

Commenting Sir Menzies said:

“It is legitimate to question at what point Alex Salmond’s vision for the scope and scale of an independent Scotland’s Armed Forces became established SNP policy.

“Last year his defence spokesman described the possibility of Scotland having only one air base as unacceptable and the First Minister presented himself as the defender of those communities faced with the closure of their local military base. Now the SNP would have the Scottish people believe that a defence force made up of one air base, one naval base and one multi-role brigade would be capable of defending Scotland’s territory, of enforcing its foreign policy abroad and of protecting its citizens from acts of aggression.

“Alex Salmond’s vision of Scotland’s defence is significantly below the proposals contained in the Defence Review which he challenged vehemently at the time as being a bad deal for Scotland. The SNP would reduce Scotland’s armed forces to a militia in all but name and with it put an end to a long and proud military history.

“The defence of the realm and its people is the most fundamental responsibility of any government and its leader. The SNP’s attitude to this responsibility is not laughable, its frightening. If this is a precursor of the way the SNP will approach other matters of national security the Scottish people should be left in no doubt of the risks inherent in Salmond’s Scotland.”

more … ]]> In response to the Statement the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore MP made in the House of Commons on a future referendum on Scottish independence, North East Fife MP Sir Menzies Campbell said:

“The present political, economic and social uncertainty is unacceptable and against the interests of the people of Scotland. An early referendum is essential to resolve this uncertainty and to give Scotland the opportunity to decide its own future.

“If the SNP are so confident why are they so reluctant to put their case to the test? Could it be that the Bravehearts are no longer quite so brave?”

more … ]]> Commenting on the end of US military operations in Iraq, Former Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Menzies Campbell said:

“Although Iraq has slipped down the British political agenda it should never be forgotten that the cost of the disastrous decision to join the United States in military action against Iraq was and remains enormous.

“Unjustified optimism based on inadequate intelligence and unthinking determination to remain close to the Bush administration led the United Kingdom into one of the most ill-advised foreign affairs decisions in living memory.

“The only hope is that we have learned lessons from a badly judged venture. The implications of the Iraq decision should inform every policy decision to commit British troops in the future.”

more … ]]> North East Fife MP Sir Menzies Campbell has added his support to an international campaign to press for women’s rights in Afghanistan.

Sir Menzies took part in an event in Westminster on Wednesday 23 November which saw a cross-party group of MPs and peers have their photograph taken in front of hundreds of handmade kites designed by campaigners from around the country to symbolise their support for women’s rights in Afghanistan.

The kite symbol is being used for the campaign as, although Afghanistan women and girls make kites, they are effectively prevented from actually flying them because of cultural attitudes which make it socially unacceptable.

Sir Menzies said:

“I am pleased to support this important campaign. The need to promote the rights of Afghan women and girls is as important as ever. Securing a peaceful future for Afghanistan is a complex task but a solution which does not see the rights of Afghan women protected means the international community has failed to fulfil one of its primary duties.”

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen said:

“We’d like to see all Parliamentarians supporting this campaign for women’s rights in Afghanistan.

“There is a clear and present danger that the rights of Afghan women and girls could be sacrificed in deals with the Taleban as the international community looks for the exit sign in Afghanistan.

“Numerous MPs have been vocal on the subject of Afghan women’s rights during the past decade. Now’s the time for them to stand up and be counted.”

The campaign is led by Action Aid UK, Amnesty International UK, CARE UK, GAPS, Womenkind Worldwide and Women for Women International. It has seen 18,000 campaigners petition the UK Government to support Afghan women’s rights. More than 8,000 kits have been made.

more … ]]> North East Fife MP Sir Menzies Campbell and Fraser Phillips, Chair of the Residents Action Force Leuchars Task Force, have sent a joint letter to the Defence Secretary urging him to provide guarantees for the future of the military base at Leuchars as a matter of urgency. Their letter is in response to a letter from the new Defence Secretary in which he rules out reconsidering the decision to close Leuchars as an RAF base.

Commenting Sir Menzies said:

“There is once again a question mark over the Army’s plans for Scotland and with that comes doubt about the Ministry of Defence’s plans for Leuchars.

“It is 4 months since the decision was taken to turn RAF Leuchars into an Army base yet the Ministry of Defence appears to suggest its plans for the base are still a work in progress. The new Secretary of State for Defence has scrupulously avoided providing a detailed timetable for the arrival of the Army at Leuchars or even guarantees that this course of action will come to pass. This lack of clarity is frankly unacceptable.”

Fraser Phillips said:

“For more than a year uncertainty has hung over the base at Leuchars and doubts about its future still remain. If the Army is coming to Leuchars the Ministry of Defence should be able to provide the people of Fife with the same sort of assurances it recently gave the community of Kinloss.

“It is extremely difficult for the local community to begin work on ensuring the transition between the RAF leaving and the Army arriving is a smooth one without a clear timetable set out by the Ministry of Defence.”

The letter from Menzies and Fraser Phillips is copied below.

“The Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP
Secretary of State for Defence
Floor 5, Main Building
Ministry of Defence
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB

24th November 2011

Thank you for your full reply to my letters of 19th and 24th October. In view of its terms I have shared its contents with Fraser Phillips, the Chairman of the Task Force which was set up in Fife to argue the case for the retention of RAF Leuchars. The views expressed in this reply reflect a joint response by both of us.

I should begin by recording my disappointment that the basing review is not to be re-opened, not least because the uncertainties you frankly identify in your letter seem to undermine the integrity of the review.

First we would like to reiterate our firm support for the retention of the base in its current form because of the clear operational benefits this offers. Nothing has changed since RAF Leuchars first undertook Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) North duties forty years ago which would undermine the rationale behind its suitability for that role. Indeed, the location of the base and the advantages which flow from it in terms of proximity to major population centres are more important than ever given the threats to British security identified by this Government in its National Security Strategy.

Figures from your Department also show that RAF Lossiemouth lost 4 times as many available flying days than RAF Leuchars over the last 5 years, the majority caused by bad weather. Clearly this has an impact upon the base’s operational suitability, on the availability of crew flying training hours and on overall cost effectiveness. Figures show that basing the Typhoon force at Lossiemouth rather than Leuchars will cost £3.4 million annually more per squadron (£10.2 million overall presuming there are to be three squadrons) because of additional transit time to training areas (the training areas near to RAF Lossiemouth being unsuitable for the Typhoon. It is worth noting that RAF Leuchars is much closer to principal national training areas and those used for training with allies).

In reaching the decision that the Typhoon Force should be transferred from Leuchars to Lossiemouth you write that your predecessor took account of factors identified by me and also ‘wider benefits that will be secured by the Department through the use of Leuchars by the Army’. Are you able to specify what these ‘wider benefits’ amount to? Have you been able to assess the weight your predecessor attached to the views of the senior commanders of the RAF itself which are understood to have been in favour of Leuchars. Can you confirm that was their advice? What assessment was made then or since of the increased risk to the population centres of the northern half of the United Kingdom by removing the Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) North capability from a station adjacent to eighty per cent of the population of Scotland and close to sensitive installations such as Torness Power Station and the nuclear submarine base at Faslane? What assessment was made of the additional flying time from Lossiemouth in the event of a multi pronged emergency involving, say, London when QRA aircraft from Scotland might be required?

The language of your letter is careful not to give any guarantee that any Army units will ever be stationed at Leuchars. Is this a legitimate inference from your stated position? Do you understand that the recent announcement in relation to Army deployments at RAF Kinloss without any similar information being given about Leuchars have reinforced anxieties about the MoD’s long term commitment to Leuchars.

Do you accept that it is possible that the Army will decide not to go to Leuchars, not least because RAF Leuchars does not offer a cost effective or practical basing solution for the Army: there is a lack of nearby training areas and the estate is limited in size.

I am grateful for the information you have provided about the costs of transferring the Typhoon Force to Lossiemouth. Can you provide more detail about the ‘parented units’ referred to at the foot of page 2 of your letter – which units is it intended to relocate and to where? At the top of page 3 still under the general heading of ‘costs of transferring Typhoons to RAF Lossiemouth’ there is a reference to the cost of ‘Move of personnel, stores and equipment, communications and infrastructure systems to RAF Leuchars (sic)’. If these are charges associated with transferring Typhoon to Lossiemouth why is there a reference to RAF Leuchars?

Your Department has conceded that there are financial disadvantages in basing the Typhoon Force at RAF Lossiemouth but claims that these are outweighed by wider Defence considerations such as the basing of the Army at Leuchars and the realisation of receipts from the disposal of high value estate in Edinburgh.

Do you accept that in the present economic climate the target for the funds to be realised by the sale of defence sites in and around Edinburgh cannot be achieved in the foreseeable future?

If the Army’s rebasing strategy is not yet completed and legitimate questions are being asked about the probability of selling its Edinburgh estate at the value estimated and within a particular time frame, the rationale for the transfer of the typhoon from RAF Leuchars to RAF Lossiemouth is therefore in doubt. This is particularly relevant when it is now proposed to reduce the professional Army from its present strength to 82,000. Should not your Department look again at that rationale – both operational and financial – for moving the Typhoon from its current base?

I appreciate that I have raised quire a number of issues but I should be grateful if you were able to provide answers.

Do you have any intention to visit Leuchars in the foreseeable future?

Yours sincerely,

Menzies Campbell”

more … ]]> The London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) has confirmed that the Olympic Flame will be carried through St Andrews on 13th June 2012.

As well as visiting the iconic Swilcan Bridge on the Old Course, the route the Flame will take in Scotland will include Loch Ness, the Forth Rail Bridge and John O’Groats.

Sir Menzies Campbell, who was the first to call for the Olympic Torch to come to St Andrews, said:

“In only 7 months we shall see the Olympic torch in St Andrews.

“For sportsmen and women, and the public too, this will be a once in a lifetime experience. St Andrews is forever associated with the Olympic Games because of its backdrop to the opening scenes of Chariots of Fire. It is only right and proper that the symbol of the Olympics is brought to the sporting mecca of St Andrews.”

more … ]]> Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie MSP has announced that former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Menzies Campbell MP will chair the Home Rule Commission, set up to develop a blueprint for Home Rule in Scotland.

The party’s Scottish conference in Dunfermline last month voted to establish a Commission to look at a settled distribution of powers between London, Edinburgh and local councils.

Sir Menzies will join other Liberal Democrats to set out a long-term vision for a strong Scotland within the UK and powerful local communities in every part of Scotland.

Commenting on the announcement, Mr Rennie said:

“I am very pleased that Sir Menzies has agreed to chair our Home Rule Commission.

“Sir Menzies brings a wealth of experience and knowledge to the table. He will be a fantastic asset as Scottish Liberal Democrats look to set out our vision for Scotland’s future.

“Liberal Democrats are ambitious for Scotland’s people and, with Home Rule in the United Kingdom, we can look to shape our own future whilst sharing risk, security and international relations in an uncertain world.

“Liberal Democrats have been setting the pace on constitutional matters for decades. We were central to the Constitutional Convention, critical to the campaign that won the referendum to create the Scottish Parliament; we set up the Steel Commission, triggered the creation of the Calman Commission and, in Government, drove through the Scotland Bill.

“It is the right time to set out our vision for a strong Scotland within the UK and for strong, powerful communities in every part of Scotland and I am pleased Sir Menzies will be part of that.”

Sir Menzies Campbell MP added:

“The Scottish Liberal Democrats have an important role to play in the debate about the future of Scotland. Home Rule has the same significance today as it had historically and, as opinion poll after opinion poll shows, best represents the views of the majority of people in Scotland.

“Continuing partnership within the United Kingdom, and consistent with that relationship, increased responsibility for our own domestic affairs is the clearest way forward.

“Home Rule meets aspirations and brings certainty where the status quo is inadequate and independence brings uncertainty.”

more … ]]> North East Fife MP Sir Menzies Campbell has written to the new Secretary of State for Defence, Philip Hammond, to ask him to look again at the basing review which will result in the RAF leaving its base at Leuchars and the Army taking occupancy.

Sir Menzies commented,

“Questions are legitimately being raised about the credibility of the MoD’s plans for Scotland and in particular whether they can be adequately financed. The new Defence Secretary needs to address these as a matter of urgency.”

Sir Menzies’ letter is as follows:

“The Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP
Secretary of State for Defence
Floor 5, Main Building
Ministry of Defence
Whitehall
London SW1A 2HB

19th October 2011

Dear Philip,

Many congratulations on your new appointment, which comes at a testing time for the proper defence of the United Kingdom.

You may by now be aware of the proposed changes to be made to the military presence in Scotland as announced by your predecessor in a statement to the House on 18th July 2011.

I believe that your appointment is an opportunity for these measures to be reconsidered. In my opinion they run counter to strategic defence objectives and fail to stand up to scrutiny.

The changes which will radically affect the defence footprint in Scotland have been constructed in such a way that, should one element fail to be realised, there will be a domino effect across the rest of the country, with all three of the services affected and the local communities which host them thrown into uncertainty.

As a result of the basing review RAF Leuchars in my constituency of North East Fife is scheduled to become an Army base. The Typhoons currently stationed at RAF Leuchars will be transferred to RAF Lossiemouth from where they will undertake the Quick Reaction Alert (North) role presently fulfilled effectively and professionally at Leuchars.

There has been an RAF presence in Fife for almost a century. For the last forty years the base at Leuchars has been responsible for patrolling and protecting the skies of the northern half of the United Kingdom. Personnel at the base have executed their duties at home and abroad with exemplary commitment and, together with their families, have become much valued members of the Fife community.

The strategic importance of the base cannot be overstated. Its close proximity to primary population centres and sensitive installations in Scotland and the north of England and in addition the speed with which its aircraft can augment the air defence of the south of England are directly relevant to the objectives of the National Security Strategy. It is believed that the recommendations made at the highest level in the Royal Air Force were for the retention of Leuchars as an RAF base. Yet strategic defence considerations appear to have been outweighed by economic considerations.

Parliamentary answers from your Department have intimated that the cost of transferring the Typhoons from RAF Leuchars to RAF Lossiemouth and the long-term cost of operating the aircraft from the more northern base are expected to be mitigated by sales of properties in the defence estate in Scotland. It is a reasonable inference that it will cost more to operate the Typhoon from Lossiemouth, not least because of the new infrastructure required at Lossiemouth. The savings your Department hopes to achieve in Scotland are dependent on the sale of ‘high value’ properties in and around Edinburgh. Questions have now legitimately been raised about the credibility of the estimates of the proceedings of such sales given the current state of the economy and the fact that buildings such as Redford Barracks (which has been identified for sale) are listed.

A possible outcome for my constituency which gives rise to widespread concern is that the Royal Air Force will vacate the base at Leuchars only for the army to fail to take occupancy, or at best take only partial occupancy, because of funding uncertainty and the predicted further net reduction in the number of army personnel (despite the return of troops from Germany). The risk is that the Royal Air Force will have been relocated from a strategically important base for ostensible financial reasons which will fail to result in any savings to the public purse. Fife will suffer the loss of the RAF at Leuchars only for the promised Army presence not to be realised.

I hope you will be able to review these basing decisions with particular emphasis on their financial implications.

Yours sincerely,

Menzies Campbell”

more … ]]> Commenting as the former head of the British Army calls for a full discussion about the potential future of Scotland`s armed forces before a referendum on independence, Member of the Intelligence and Security Committee and former leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Menzies Campbell MP said:

“The chickens are coming home to roost for the SNP.

“Sooner or later they will have to come clean on how many aircraft, ships and regiments there would be in an ‘independent’ Scotland; why they want to leave NATO, the most successful defence alliance in history and the saviour of the people of Libya; how much they would spend on defence and the economic impact on the defence industry and the number of jobs that would be lost in Scotland.”