---

Mr. Soames: I do not mean to labour the point, but the hon. Lady raises issues that are for the Department of Transport and the Treasury to deal with. So far as the military side is concerned, which is all that we are able to discuss this evening, as I told her hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy), what matters is that the services are able to conduct operations efficiently, effectively and promptly, and to that end we go to the Baltic Exchange when it is necessary to charter ships.

The hon. Gentleman said that it was wrong that we should borrow ships from the Americans, but we are grateful to the Americans for their help in providing sealift. It saved us chartering two extra ships. When we go to the Baltic Exchange to charter a ship, if a British ship is available, that is good news. If it is not, we charter what we need for the job, so that we can get the best value for money for the taxpayer. Plainly, it would be pleasant if all the ships that we charter were British, but they are not, and there are good reasons for that.

Ms Squire: I listened to what the Minister said, but we should debate what ships would be available for a planned exercise and our ability to obtain the ships that we would need in a sudden emergency. That is of concern not just to me and other hon. Members, but to the Select Committee on Defence.

1 Feb 1996 : Column 1157

I quote now from the Committee's sixth report, produced last year, entitled, "Defence Use of Civilian Transport Assets and Personnel":

"In a continually changing strategic environment where increasing emphasis is placed on the rapid deployment of our Armed Forces overseas the role of civilian transport assets and personnel becomes ever more significant. In our view, the ability of civilian markets to respond in a crisis has for too long been taken for granted; a process of regular and detailed review of all aspects of transport provision is essential before a satisfactory degree of confidence on this front can be established and maintained."

I now deal with procurement. I, too, wish to criticise the Government for the continuing delay in their decision on which of the two yards will get the order for the three frigates. As my hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen said, 1,100 jobs are at stake at Yarrow on the Clyde. That shipbuilder is saying that it cannot continue to keep its work force unless it knows for definite, not in the next few weeks but now, what the Ministry of Defence decision will be.

I appreciate the points that were made about the hundreds of jobs at risk to Vosper Thornycroft. The Government do not seem to learn from history what happens when we allow our manufacturing base, particularly our shipbuilding and refitting capabilities, to decline. I accept that increasingly we operate on the basis of coalitions with our American and European allies, but we could experience problems if we envisage the threat as purely national.

The Evening Standard spoke eloquently last week about defence procurement in its editorial on the contract for battlefield ambulances being awarded to, I am pleased to say, Land Rover instead of an Austrian firm. What the article said also applies to naval procurement, however.

According to the Evening Standard,

"The British defence industry accounts for 425,000 jobs, or 7 per cent. of the nation's manufacturing workforce. No Government can afford to ignore this. It is absurd in this context to talk of the Government skewing the market: the Government is the market. It is the responsibility of Government to act as steward for the national interest."

I hope that the Minister will heed those comments, and accept that Britain must not abdicate its ability to build its own warships, aircraft and land weaponry. It must not lose out in that regard.

I gather that the Secretary of State cannot be present for most of the debate. I must say, however, that--like, perhaps, some naval personnel and others--I sometimes wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman occasionally needs to be reminded that he is no longer at the Treasury. It strikes me as appropriate to quote a famous verse from "HMS Pinafore". Before hon. Members exit rapidly at the thought of hearing me sing--I admit that I was chucked out of the school choir--let me assure them that I intend simply to recite the verse. Hon. Members may wish to join in.

Mr. Dennis Turner (Wolverhampton, South-East): Go on, sing it.

Ms Squire: No, no; I will not do that, even for my hon. Friend.

The words of the song will be very familiar:

"Now landsmen all, whoever you may be,


If you want to rise to the top of the tree,


If your soul isn't fettered to an office stool,


Be careful to be guided by this golden rule--


Stick close to your desks and never go to sea,


And you all may be Rulers of the Queen's Navee!"

1 Feb 1996 : Column 1158

The Royal Navy may sometimes consider that that verse is still an appropriate comment on certain aspects of the present Government.

I began by mentioning the defence costs study, and ended by quoting from "HMS Pinafore". In between, I have tried to make some pertinent points about the difficulties currently facing the Royal Navy, its personnel and its infrastructure. If I had been able to read as much as I would have wished, I could have said much more about global maritime strategy; but I shall conclude by drawing the Government's attention to some points made in a book that landed on my desk recently, entitled "The Fundamentals of British Maritime Doctrine".

Let me quote from the afterword:

"The Royal Navy and Royal Marines are accustomed to the mayhem of world events, but the Naval Service of today puts to sea in a particularly confused world, in which security problems are not amenable to clear-cut solutions . . . In this environment positive forces must be united if there is to be progress . . . British forces must not only be able to operate closely with Allies and friends, but must be seminal in enhancing the capability of multinational forces. Clarity of thought and expression is essential in this environment. Without it, planning will be diffuse and execution muddled."

I hope that, in the next 12 months, the Government's approach and their support for the Royal Navy will feature clarity, careful planning and clear decision making.

5.53 pm

Mr. Toby Jessel (Twickenham): It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West(Ms Squire), as it was a pleasure to hear her, in such expansive form, deliver such an interesting speech. She quoted from "HMS Pinafore"; I should like to quote from "The Mikado"--the song of the Lord High Executioner, who had a "little list" of people whom he wished to execute. He sang:

"I've got a little list--I've got a little list".

One of the people on the list was

"The idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone,


All centuries but this, and every country but his own."

Sometimes, in this honourable House, people are not enthusiastic enough about praising their own country. However, they certainly do not include my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces, who, in a forthright intervention on the speech of the hon. Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy) an hour or so ago, robustly praised the British armed services--the Navy, the Army and the Royal Air Force--for their splendid achievements in Bosnia, as did my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence Procurement. That is what I like to hear.

My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North (Mr. Griffiths), who has just left the Chamber, said that the morale of the British armed services--including the Royal Navy--was high, and I believe that to be so. Bosnia, however, illustrates the fact that war has certainly not ended in the world for good. We can think of at least four examples in the past 15 years that have involved the British services, including the Royal Navy: Bosnia, the Falkland Islands, Kuwait and, of course, Northern Ireland. In that context, I include the Royal Marines in the Royal Navy.

That Britain should have had to be involved in armed conflicts of international significance four times in the past 15 years shows that human nature has not changed. Throughout human history, nations have attacked one

1 Feb 1996 : Column 1159

another, and it would be absurdly arrogant and ridiculously optimistic for anyone to assume that human nature has somehow changed for the better--that we shall be immune from that risk either in the next few years or in the next century. I hope and trust that our Government, and the present Parliament and its successors, will always be vigilant in upholding British defences, and that we shall never relax our guard. It would be extremely dangerous to give way to that temptation, thus increasing the risk to our country.

I was brought up with the Royal Navy. I hope that the House will not mind my saying something personal in that way. My father was in the Navy for 40 years as a regular naval officer; in the second world war he was a destroyer captain--much decorated, I am proud to say: he won a DSO and two DSCs. After the war, he was on the staff of the Royal Naval college in Greenwich, where he was an instructor in naval tactics and naval strategy before going to do the same for the Indians in India. That marked the beginning of my interest in India.

I was sent into the Royal Navy as a cadet at the Royal Naval college in Dartmouth when I was 13. I had been in and out of the Navy twice by the time I was 20. At 17, I asked to leave; they heaved a sigh of relief, but I went back in to do national service within eight months, and served as a midshipman on HMS Glasgow, the flagship of the Mediterranean fleet and sister ship of the Belfast town class cruiser, now moored on the Thames. The commander-in-chief was Lord Mountbatten, a remarkable man who ought to be honoured every year in this country and never forgotten for his splendid gifts and achievements.

I remember the words that were carved in enormous stone letters at Dartmouth:

"It is on the Navy, under good providence of God, that our wealth, prosperity and peace depend."

That was true then, and it is true today. As thehon. Member for Dunfermline, West pointed out, a large proportion of our food supplies and materials, and of our exports, still travel by sea. The Royal Navy remains absolutely essential.

As the hon. Member for Dunfermline, West told stories about two admirals, I hope that hon. Members will not mind if I tell a story about a third, Admiral Sir James Somerville, who was commander-in-chief of the British naval force in Gibraltar during the second world war.

My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North referred to the women in the Royal Navy who are the successors of the Wrens--the Women's Royal Naval Service. During the second world war, the chief officer of the Wrens in Gibraltar had the title of Chief Officer Wrens, the abbreviation for which was COW, which she did not like. She applied to Admiral Sir James Somerville for her title to be changed, and he sent a signal around the fleet saying, "Chief Officer Wrens will in future be known as Senior Office Wrens." He then invited her to dinner and they were great friends thereafter.

The hon. Member for Torfaen was kind enough to predict that I would refer to service bands and the Royal Marine bands. I am happy to reassure him that I intend to do exactly that. The performances of the Royal Marine bands are extremely fine. They have recently had to leave Deal, and although I can understand how people at Deal

1 Feb 1996 : Column 1160

feel, the cost of a whopping great Victorian barracks became impossible to sustain. They have moved, for the time being at least, to Portsmouth.

When the Minister of State for the Armed Forces was speaking in the debate on the Army last month, I intervened and referred to the training of Army bands at the Royal Military school of music at Kneller Hall in my constituency. Those Army bands are without exception the envy of the entire world and I am very proud of the fact that they are trained in Twickenham.

The number of Army bands has fallen with reduced defence expenditure, as have the number of Royal Marine bands, and once again there is talk of a joint services school of music. There is some surplus capacity at Kneller Hall, where a new bandstand is under construction, which--I hope--is a mark of confidence in the future.

Whatever happens to the Royal Marine bands--I would not trespass on the territory of my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North, although I do not know how permanent the arrangements are--and if ever the Government decide on a joint services school of music, the Royal Marine bands would be most warmly welcomed in Twickenham, where they could train alongside the Army bands at Kneller Hall. I am certain that the technical and traditional differences in the interpretation of music and in the instruction on the different forms of phrasing required by the Royal Marines would be fully respected.

I shall now refer to the preservation of historic warships. I declare an interest as an unpaid director of the Warship Preservation Trust, which was set up by our former colleague, Sir Philip Goodhart. He perceived that future generations--perhaps well into the 21st century--would be able easily to see 18th to 19th-century warships such as HMS Victory, and 19th-century warships such as HMS Warrior, but that in 100 years, unless somebody did something about it, nobody would be able to see 20th-century warships such as those that fought in the second world war.

Sir Philip knew that the Ministry of Defence was unable to find the substantial sums needed to pay for preservation and that the National Art Collections Fund, the National Heritage Memorial Fund and such bodies were crammed full of people who cared passionately about paintings, sculptures and old buildings, but were not very naval-minded and not particularly interested in finding large sums to preserve warships. He therefore decided to set up the trust, and already it has two ships--a submarine from the second world war and an old frigate that fought in the Falkland Islands 15 years ago, which is now out of date.

Although, as we are all aware, the Belfast is moored in the Thames where people can see it, one wants a complete range of warships. Nobody questions the preservation of military aircraft for educational purposes, whether at Duxford, Hendon, the Imperial War museum or the Science museum. Aircraft tend to be rather smaller than ships, however, so it is rather a larger undertaking to preserve an old ship and stop it rusting and falling to pieces.

The national lottery bodies should take an interest in the matter. The National Heritage Select Committee, on which I serve, is shortly to embark on a review of the structure of the national lottery and the way in which its funds are allocated, and I very much hope that it considers proposing a structure to make it possible for national lottery funds to be used for the preservation of warships.

1 Feb 1996 : Column 1161

The same is true of that splendid, beautiful and magnificent ship the royal yacht Britannia, which was the subject of an Adjournment debate at the end of 1994, to which my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces replied. He paid tribute to that magnificent ship, not only for its royal and ceremonial duties, but for its excellent record of promoting British trade abroad.

If, however, for the reasons that my hon. Friend the Minister set out, Britannia eventually has to be withdrawn from service--which many of us for sentimental and other reasons would greatly regret--it would be unthinkable to sell it to the Americans or any other worthy people in different parts of the world and not retain it in the United Kingdom.

---