Philip Hammond on the future of the TA: 'I don't want people playing at being soldiers' Five months ago, Mr Hammond announced that for the first time in a decade the department's budget had been balanced. He wants to fill the gap with a beefed up, better-equipped and professionalised reserves. The hope is to double the size of the reserves to 30,000 by 2018. Members of the Territorial Army and other reserve forces have a minimum commitment of 27 training days a year. This often includes a two-week period of continuous training often with full-time soldiers. They typically train one night a week and spend one weekend away each month. When deployed they earn similar wages to regular military staff and they also receive an annual bonus known as a "bounty" worth nearly £1,600 for those who have served for more than five years. Its members have included the David Davis, the former Conservative leadership contender, Lord Deedes, the former cabinet minister and editor of The Daily Telegraph, and Billy Connolly, the Scottish comedian. Since 2003, more than 27,000 members of the reserves have been mobilised in Iraq or Afghanistan. Employers are obliged to keep a reservist's job open if they are serving a tour. The days of so-called "weekend warrior" amateurs has to end, the Defence Secretary says. "We're not interested in reservists who want to play at being a soldier," he says. There will be £1.8bn to ensure reserves get decent equipment, train overseas and alongside regulars. There will also be a new limit on length of service most reserves will need to commit to: one six-month period over five years. Employers will welcome this clarity, many whom like the leadership skills reserves pick-up but don't like losing valuable staff for indeterminate periods. As well as working more directly with businesses to recruit reserves, a green paper published later this month will float the idea of introducing tax incentives for firms that let their staff experience military service. The Defence Secretary also hopes to encourage some of the 17,000 services personnel who typically leave the forces each year to remain in the reserves. He talks of "financial inducements" to encourage ex-squaddies to continue to serve part-time. "The more ex-regulars we have in the reserves the better the reserves will integrate with the regulars," he says. To emphasise this new era, even the name of the Territorial Army - reminiscent of Captain Mainwaring and his hapless Dad's Army recruits - may go. "I think there is a case for changing the name to something that sounds less like territorial defence and more like full integration with the army," he says. Legislation would probably be necessary to do this as the Territorial Army's name is enshrined in law. Although the army had used volunteer soldiers during the 18th and 19th centuries, it was not until 1908 that the Territorial Army was created, although it was initially known as the Territorial Force and it was not until 1920 that the current name was adopted. But isn't it risky to replace full-time soldiers with part-timers? "Reserves that are well trained are not inherently risky," Mr Hammond argues, adding that it is in support roles such as engineering, signals and logistics that will be have the highest number of reserves. "A significant number of reservists in such areas will have relevant jobs in civvy street," he says. Although his critics may regard Mr Hammond as an accountant who is more concerned with balanced budgets than safeguarding the nation, the Defence Secretary has a clear vision of Britain's armed forces. This is a force fit for an uncertain future. It will have the mobility and agility to respond to threats we haven't thought about or planned for yet. Lots of countries have lots of soldiers under arms and tanks, but they can't deploy them around the world and keep them supplied for a decade. That is our capability. So, out go the heavy armour of self-propelled guns and large tanks - in come more helicopters and lighter-armed vehicles and helicopters. Despite the cuts, Britain will still be left with the fourth largest defence budget in the world. By 2020 there will be two new 65,000 tonne aircraft carriers and seven Astute class hunter killer submarines, as well as six Type-45 destroyers. Thirteen new Type-26 frigates are expected to take the seas at the start of the next decade. Mr Hammond has already taken delivery of the first Typhoon class new £100million strike fighters, which can travel at twice the speed of the Harrier jump jets they will replace on the Royal Navy's carriers. There will also be 14 new Chinooks and an upgraded Puma transport helicopter. This lightweight military will still pack a punch, he says. He seems infuriated by the critics - many of whom he considers to be retired and out of touch - who complain that he will leave the army at its smallest since the turn of the 19th century. In 1800 we were using muzzle-loading muskets that took five minutes to reload. You can't compare a modern infantry with one 20 years ago - let alone 100 years ago. The weapons systems, the battlefield communications and protective equipment are far more sophisticated. It is invidious to compare man for man. The same applies to those who bemoan the move to a more slim-line Royal Navy. "People who say we've only got 19 frigates and destroyers need to look at the capability," he says. A type 45 destroyer has more firepower than a Dreadnought. It may anger his Liberal Democrat coalition partners but a full like-for-like replacement of Britain's trident nuclear weapon system seems to be a central plank of the Hammond plan. The Sunday Telegraph revealed during the summer that the Defence Secretary had signed a £1billion contract to build reactors for a new generation of nuclear submarines to replace trident. The deal will create 300 jobs and will include an 11-year refit at a Rolls-Royce plant at Raynesway, in Derby, where the reactors will be built. Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem chief secretary to the Treasury, is currently leading an investigation into cheaper alternatives to a full replacement, but although the Defence Secretary stresses he does not want to "prejudge" this report you could be forgiven for thinking Mr Hammond has made up his mind. "The problem I have is that any alternative might be cheaper," he says, adding that his plan entails replacing the submarines but keeping the same design of missiles and warheads. Everything I've learned about complex procurement projects suggests to me that reusing existing technology and assets will always be lower cost and risk rather than one. Many Tory supporters back full Trident replacement, but they remain dismayed hat a Conservative Prime Minister and Defence Secretary are cutting up to 54,000 military jobs while simultaneously protecting the foreign aid budget. Mr Hammond argues that wise spending on aid can actually reduce the MoD's costs. "It is cheaper to prevent a conflict than stop one once it has started," he says. The focus of the UK's aid programme needs to move over time to building stability in states that if they failed could present a threat to the UK. Supporting the creation of jobs for young men in unstable parts of the world is the best way not to turn them into jihadists. He may at times be characterised as a cool-headed numbers man, but the Defence Secretary says he is fully aware of the hit to morale the age of austerity has had on the military. Services personnel have already endured a two-year pay freeze and face two more years of wage restraint. Later this year the MoD will sketch out its "new employment model" which will seek to radically change where services personnel live and how they are paid. With the wind down of operations in Afghanistan and the end of deployment of many troops in Germany, Mr Hammond wants many soldiers to be stationed in the same part of the country for up to 20 years. He says he is looking at ways to raising home ownership amongst those in the armed forces, so that they can either live at home or do weekly commutes. "This implies children being educated in local schools and service personnel using local healthcare," he says. It would also allow spouses and partners to get jobs in the local economy. We have to focus more on our people - that's our best asset.