| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
RB-44 Army Light Vehicle
4. Mr. Davidson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement concerning theRB-44 Army light vehicle.[26922]
Mr. Arbuthnot: I am pleased that, as a result of the programme to resolve the braking problems that we had with the Reynolds Boughton RB-44 heavy utility truck, the vehicles are now re-entering service with the Army.
Mr. Davidson: Does the Minister agree that that was a poor answer for someone who has just rushed all the way from Glasgow to receive it? The vehicle's history is a litany of incompetence by the MOD and the private sector builder. Does the Minister agree that the matter would be far better passed to the National Audit Office for investigation?
Mr. Arbuthnot: No, I do not agree--I thought that it was rather a good answer. Of more than 800 vehicles that we bought, nearly two thirds are back in service with the Army, and the others are awaiting modifications. The modifications are relatively minor and the company is meeting the cost of providing kits to make them.
Type 23 Frigates
5. Dr. Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the advantages to the Royal Navy and to the United Kingdom of the Government's recent order for three type 23 frigates.[26923]
Mr. Arbuthnot: The order will provide a major enhancement to the Royal Navy's escort fleet and show the Government's commitment to first-class equipment for the armed forces. The order is worth around £400 million and will bring work to Yarrow and companies across the UK.
Dr. Spink: Does my hon. Friend agree that his answer illustrates two incontrovertible facts--that the UK continues to maintain the most professional, formidable and technologically superior armed forces; and that the great benefits to Scotland of remaining in the UK extend further than the Yarrow shipyard?
Mr. Arbuthnot: I agree. We have ordered some highly capable ships at a most affordable price, and by placing that order we have ensured the continuation in British industry of a capability that we need to see continued. The order is good news for the UK and for Scotland.
Procurement Projects
6. Mr. Hutton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of his Department's major procurement projects have late in-service dates.[26924]
Mr. Arbuthnot: The Ministry of Defence's most recent annual major projects report to the Public Accounts Committee showed that, of the projects covered, 21 were reported as having late actual or planned in-service dates.
Mr. Hutton: Is it a fact that the last National Audit Office inquiry showed that 90 per cent. of major
procurement contracts had late in-service dates? Are not there significant delays in placing major new contracts, particularly in respect of the batch 2 Trafalgar class replacement programme? Why should defence industry workers pay the price of the Government's total and complete incompetence in managing the nation's procurement budget?
Mr. Arbuthnot: It is not a question of incompetence. There is a natural tendency towards delay in a large number of defence contracts. That is partly because trying to match the requirements of different countries to a collaborative project is extremely difficult, and partly the effect of increasing and speedily advancing new technology. Delay can actually bring benefits. If there is delay in acquiring a piece of equipment, it can mean a better piece of equipment, and sometimes one that is cheaper.
The greatest example of a UK technological project was the Trident system. The hon. Gentleman may agree, although I suggest that he has a word with some of his colleagues on the Opposition Benches, who might not share his views. The Trident system has been an 11-year project that has come in on time and under budget. It has provided a defence of this country beyond all proportion to the amount of money that we have spent on it.
Mr. Mans:
Does my hon. Friend agree that the one way to ensure that all procurement projects do not meet their in-service dates is to carry out a full-scale defence review, as advocated by the Opposition? That would have a devastating effect on jobs in the defence industry, especially in my county of Lancashire, which depends so heavily on defence industries.
Mr. Arbuthnot:
My hon. Friend is right. I have always believed that the Opposition want to carry out a major defence review because they lack the courage to say what they really want to do, which is to make deep defence cuts. We know that they want to do that. My hon. Friend raises the point that a defence review would mean that equipment procurement would come to a standstill, and that would be the effect of electing a party that we know we cannot trust on defence.
7. Mr. Eric Clarke:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the strength of the Royal Navy in 1990; and what will be the strength of the Royal Navy under current plans by the end of the decade.[26925]
Mr. Soames:
The total strength of the Royal Navy on 1 April 1990 was 63,000. The estimated strength for 1 April 1999 is some 44,000, including the Royal Marines and personnel undergoing training.
Mr. Clarke:
Will the Minister explain how he reconciles the fact that the Conservative manifesto in 1992 stated that a cut of 27 per cent. in the armed forces would be devastating with the 30 per cent. cut in the Royal Navy?
Mr. Soames:
I know that the hon. Gentleman, living in the wonderful time warp of Midlothian, will not have noticed that there has been an extraordinary change in the
Mr. David Martin:
Can my hon. Friend confirm that--as I find in Portsmouth--while the Navy is smaller, morale is high and the professionalism with which it goes about its tasks is second to none? Does my hon. Friend know of any proposals from Labour or the Liberal Democrats that would increase the efficiency of the Royal Navy or increase the numbers of people who serve in it?
Mr. Soames:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend and I know that the Royal Navy is grateful for his support in Portsmouth. He is right to point out that morale in the Royal Navy is high. The personnel of the Royal Navy are working hard and are away from home rather more than we would like, but they do a remarkable job. I know of no such proposals from the other parties and the only proposals that we have heard are those that are likely to harm gravely the Royal Navy and the defence interests of the United Kingdom.
Mr. Dalyell:
Does the Minister know anything about Midlothian? Can he name one town in the county?
Mr. Soames:
What I know about Midlothian, one could write on the back of a very large stamp. I know that it is a marvellous and wonderful place in Scotland and that it is lucky enough to have the hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Clarke) as one of its Members of Parliament. The hon. Member for Linlithgow(Mr. Dalyell) made Midlothian famous by the Midlothian question, to which we are all waiting to hear the answer.
Lady Olga Maitland:
Does my hon. Friend agree, further to his remarks, that it is not manpower alone that is needed for the Navy of the future, but high technology? Does he further agree that our ships are now equipped with the best technology that this country can provide and that we need to have a sense of priorities so that we are fit and capable of fighting into the next century?
Mr. Soames:
My hon. Friend is right. The Royal Navy is probably technologically better equipped now than it has ever been. As my hon. Friend knows, the acquisition of Tomahawk will greatly expand its opportunities, and the type 23 frigate, which my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) has just mentioned, is not only a more sophisticated ship in every way, both technologically and in terms of capability, but requires30 per cent. fewer crew than its predecessor while being a far more powerful ship. Those are the ways in which we are going and they are inevitably the ways in which technology drives the armed forces. Britain is at the forefront of taking advantage of all those exciting new opportunities.
Mr. Murphy:
How can we take the Minister seriously when he talks about either the geography of Midlothian
Mr. Soames:
My geography may be a bit rusty, but I do not think that West Lothian is that far from Midlothian. However, I apologise to the hon. Member for Linlithgow, and to Mr. Gladstone.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |