Previous page | Contents | Next page
14.1  |  Military equipment (post-conflict)
narrative around our intent, which should also give confidence to deployed service
men and women that vehicle vulnerabilities are being addressed.”
788.  A discussion followed about the options for replacing the current fleet of light
armoured and unarmoured vehicles “in full” and it was agreed that those should be
pursued. The deployment of Ridgback into theatre was “Ministers’ first priority”.
789.  Mr Browne “emphasised the need for a clear and coherent public narrative”
about what had been achieved and what was being done “to enhance the robustness”
of the PPV fleet. He asked for a Written Ministerial Statement to be produced before
Parliament rose for the recess on 22 July.
790.  A Written Ministerial Statement on protected mobility was not made until
29 October 2008.416
791.  Mr John Hutton, who had succeeded Mr Browne as Defence Secretary earlier
in October, stated:
“We have already achieved a great deal in improving the protected mobility options
available to commanders on operations. Mastiff is unquestionably a success story.
For its role, Mastiff is delivering the very highest levels of protection available
anywhere in the world. Where it can be used, and its size and weight mean it has
its limitations, it is clearly the vehicle of choice. That is why the Prime Minister
announced a further order of these vehicles last year …
“It is not only through Mastiff that we are delivering a world class protected vehicle
capability; we are also delivering Ridgback. Using the smaller Cougar 4x4 chassis,
and innovative, cutting‑edge UK armour technologies, we will be able to deliver
protection levels close to that of Mastiff in a package that is able to better access
urban areas, increasing the survivability of troops in these roles …”
792.  On Snatch Land Rovers, Mr Hutton said:
“Inevitably, any statement on protected mobility must address the role of the
Snatch Land Rover, a vehicle which has received considerable criticism. First, to
be absolutely clear, I can inform the House that – in addition to the regular reviews
that are conducted into protected mobility – senior operational commanders were
asked to specifically consider the requirement for the Snatch Land Rover and its
importance to operations. The response was clear: commanders need a vehicle of
the size, weight and profile of Snatch Land Rover, capable of transporting men, to
fulfil their tasks in theatre. Further, the availability of such a vehicle is considered
mission critical …”
793.  Mr Hutton said that that did not mean there was “no action” to be taken on Snatch.
There was a programme in place to learn lessons from the development of Mastiff and
416  House of Commons, Official Report, columns 28WS‑30WS.
135
Previous page | Contents | Next page