| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Anti-ballistic Missile System
10. Mr. David Atkinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress of the feasibility study on an anti-ballistic missile defence system. [30892]
Mr. Arbuthnot: Our national pre-feasibility study on defence against ballistic missiles, which was conducted by a consortium led by British Aerospace, has recently been completed and we expect to receive its final report shortly.
Mr. Atkinson: Does my hon. Friend accept that it is entirely conceivable that Europe and Britain will come within range of long-range ballistic missiles supplied by North Korea and possibly China to north African and middle eastern pariah states long before the medium extended air defence system is put in place to defend Europe as planned in 2005, and that the need for a ballistic missile defence of Europe is now urgent? What discussions has he had in sharing this sense of urgency with his NATO and Western European Union colleagues? What has been the outcome of these discussions?
Mr. Arbuthnot: We are concerned about the emerging risks and we are doing something about that, both nationally and with our allies. Only a fortnight ago, I was fortunate to visit the national test facility and the ballistic missile defence office in the United States, where I was enormously impressed by the important and very interesting work that is being done. We expect to take decisions by the end of the year.
Mr. Dalyell: What are the consequences of the Ariane catastrophe for anti-ballistic missile research?
Mr. Arbuthnot: I believe that there are none at the moment.
Mr. Duncan Smith: Does my hon. Friend agree that at this stage we should talk up the real threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear weapons and, most important,
by the ability of some countries to launch nuclear, chemical or biological threats beyond their own borders? Does he agree that it would be a gross dereliction of duty on the part of this or any other Government not to notify the public of the serious and growing threat to this island?
Mr. Arbuthnot: My hon. Friend takes a close interest in the matter. There are two issues involved: the defence of our troops in theatre and the defence of our national integrity. Both issues are important, but we believe that the first must have priority at the moment.
Operation Purple Star
11. Mr. Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many merchant vessels chartered by his Department to take part in Operation Purple Star were British-registered. [30893]
Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Trickett) must resume his seat when another hon. Member is asking a question.
Mr. Soames: The answer is none, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Turner: Does the Minister agree that history reminds us of the heroic role played by the British merchant fleet in the life of this country? Does he agree further that that proud naval history is under threat because the Government have betrayed the British merchant fleet by not engaging one British ship? They have commissioned the ships of virtually every other country in recent times.
Mr. Soames: I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman's proposition. The Government have taken many positive steps to improve the competitiveness of British shipping and to encourage more shipowners to fly the red ensign. They include generous funding for training, liberalisation of officer nationality requirements, changes in registration laws and the introduction of roll-over relief on capital allowances.
Only 37 British--flagged ro-ros--the roll on/roll off ships to which the hon. Gentleman refers--are militarily useful, and all of them are currently on extended charter. I am quite sure that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting that we should disrupt their charters in time of peace simply for the sake of buying British. We believe that we have a very satisfactory system for chartering ships through the Baltic exchange. We will continue to use that to gain best value for money for the taxpayer and the best possible use for our armed forces.
Mr. Devlin:
One civilian ship that we do not have to charter in time of war is the royal yacht, Britannia. I urge my hon. Friend to consider commissioning a fast, modern replacement ship which Her Majesty could use, which could be utilised in our trade promotion work around the world and which could be built in the north-east of England.
Mr. Soames:
My hon. Friend tempts me down a path that I am reluctant to tread. No decisions have yet been made about the future of Britannia. However, the hon. Gentleman clearly has a formidable case to make regarding the north-east of England and I am sure that the House has noted his comments.
12. Mr. Chisholm:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department makes of the industrial implications of procurement decisions. [30894]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
We have always taken industrial factors into account in defence procurement decisions. We have recently taken steps to ensure that that happens in a more systematic way.
Mr. Chisholm:
I am glad that there has been a slight improvement recently. Is it not high time that the Government took account of this country's employment and industrial base in awarding defence contracts and abandoned the hands-off approach that they have adopted in the past 17 years? Is the Minister aware that more than 300 jobs at GEC-Marconi Avionics in my constituency depend on the awarding of the Sea King airborne early warning contract? The rival bids involve far more development and manufacturing work that is being done overseas. [Interruption.]
Mr. Arbuthnot:
The hon. Gentleman's question was clearly greeted with enthusiasm. He makes his constituency point in the way in which I would expect him to do, but I remind him that some 90 per cent. of work by value done for the Ministry of Defence is won by British companies in this country.
Mrs. Ann Winterton:
Does my hon. Friend agree that defence procurement contracts awarded to this country are vital to the maintaining of our manufacturing capacity? Will he continue to look favourably on Royal Ordnance at Radway Green in my constituency, which is operating successfully at home, in Europe and overseas to win contracts in the face of stiff and--it must be said--not always fair competition?
Mr. Arbuthnot:
I was pleased to be able to announce recently the award of a contract for Royal Ordnance--partly, if I may say so, on the urging of my hon. Friend, who has worked so hard for her constituents in this regard.
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Mullin: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 11 June. [30912]
The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major): This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
Mr. Mullin: Has the Prime Minister heard today's admission by the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash)
that Sir James Goldsmith is helping to fund his faction within the Conservative party? Does it strike the Prime Minister as odd that a foreign-based millionaire--[Hon. Members: "Billionaire."] Does it strike him as odd that a foreign-based billionaire who has set up his own political party and is running candidates against official Conservative candidates is also funding his own fifth column within the Conservative party? Has the right hon. Gentleman any plans to do anything about this extraordinary situation?
The Prime Minister: I had not seen that statement by Sir James Goldsmith, but of course Sir James is a man of independent mind. Sir James is of course entirely free, if he wishes, to field his own candidates at a general election--I suppose that anyone with £20 million to spend can afford to do that--but he is not going to change our policy.
Mr. Dykes: May I thank my right hon. Friend for his plans to put some backbone into some of our colleagues who seem to be irrationally obsessed with Sir James Goldsmith, and very scared about him as well? That, presumably, is why my right hon. Friend authorised the attendance of four members of the Government at last night's bizarre proceedings.
The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend may himself think that he requires authorisation to attend particular meetings, but I assure him that all my hon. Friends will use their own independent judgment about the meetings they attend, and about the judgments they take from those meetings.
Mr. Blair: It may seem indelicate to intrude on private grief, but may I ask the Prime Minister what we are to make of the political party in government when a former Cabinet Minister hosts a reception for a former Chancellor of the Exchequer and his campaign manager, to advocate withdrawal from the European Union--in the presence of Ministers--to the leader of a different political party altogether, whose objective is to remove Conservative Members of Parliament at the general election?
The Prime Minister: I must say that the right hon. Gentleman has a very selective memory. He entered the House on a programme of leaving the European Union.
Mr. Blair: The problem is that the right hon. Gentleman's political party is now moving towards advocating that programme. [Interruption.] It is. Let us put it to the test. Will the Prime Minister now join me in saying that the real agenda of many of those who will support the Referendum Bill today is to push Britain to the point of withdrawal from Europe? Will he join me unequivocally in saying that the views of those people who will make that case today are wrong?
The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman can invent his own policies: he should not invent policies for my party. I have made it clear in speech after speech and in the recent White Paper that this country's role lies within the European Union, fighting for the sort of European Union that is amenable to this country. That remains the position. We intend to try to provide, within the European Union, a set of circumstances that is right
for this country. That does not mean that we accept every element of policy that our European partners propose, and it does not mean that we would never be isolated, unlike the right hon. Gentleman. It does not mean that we would give up the veto, unlike the right hon. Gentleman. We are there to fight for British interests, not to follow the policy that the right hon. Gentleman would follow and surrender British interests.
Mr. Blair: Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman stand at that Dispatch Box as Prime Minister and say that the views of those people are wrong? If he carries on running from them, they will carry on chasing him and the losers will be Britain, our jobs, our industry and our influence. When will the Prime Minister finally stand up and take a lead?
The Prime Minister: I have told the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman is putting views in the mouths of my hon. Friends that are not theirs, and my hon. Friends have made that clear time after time. If the right hon. Gentleman really wants to sort out problems on Europe, he might make it clear that he disagrees with those 50 of his Back Benchers who have issued their own manifesto disagreeing with every element of the leader of the Labour party's policy on Europe. Perhaps he will make it clear that he disagrees with them. Our policy is to be within Europe, fighting for British interests, disagreeing with our European partners when we must, and agreeing with them when it is in the interests of this country.
Mr. John Greenway: Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the announcement by the National Lottery Charities Board of £150 million of grants today, mostly to help young people? Does that not show that the House was right to make the charities board one of the recipients of national lottery funding and is that not the true image of the lottery in this country?
The Prime Minister: I very much welcome many of the awards that have been made today. They cover a wide range, including money for Childline, the British Red Cross, an ex-service men's association and the Samaritans. They will all have widespread support across the country. Having studied the list of all the awards made today, a small number of the awards do not in my judgment reflect the way in which Parliament and the public expected the lottery money to be spent. That is true of a minority of awards. The freedom to make those awards was given to the individual boards by the House and they have responsibility for the awards that they make. Overwhelmingly, they exercise that responsibility well. From time to time, they make awards that are ill founded and ill judged.
Q2. Mr. Barry Jones: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 11 June. [30914]
The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Jones: I have given the right hon. Gentleman previous notice of my question. Will he revoke his policy on market testing as it affects military units such as the 1,800-strong RAF Sealand in my constituency, where
large-scale redundancies are feared? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is no level playing field when predator contractors compete against the in-house bid in RAF Sealand, such as GEC and Brown and Root?
Will the Prime Minister give consideration to making my part of the world a market-testing-free zone on the basis that, if something is working, one should not fix it? Why put profit before the national interest? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in the Falklands and Gulf wars, RAF Sealand gave magnificent service to Britain? That is all that it wants to continue to do.
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of the matter that he wished to raise. The hon. Gentleman has been assiduous in his support for RAF Sealand and has raised it with a number of my hon. Friends in the past. Our intention is to ensure that the armed forces get the highest possible quality of support at the best value for money for the defence budget. An announcement on the winning contractor is expected towards the end of the year. I am not proposing to revoke our present policy in any way--it is the right policy--but I give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that the in-house bid will be evaluated against precisely the same criteria as the two external bids and that the judgment will be made on value for money.
Mr. Peter Bottomley:
I join the Leader of the Opposition in putting to my right hon. Friend some things that are wrong. Would it not be wrong to oppose the Family Law Bill, which has provisions on domestic violence? As to that measure's marriage elements, is it not right to get rid of quickie divorces? Ought we not to tidy away the problems of first marriages before letting people get on to second marriages, and would it not be wrong to oppose the Bill because of that as well?
The Prime Minister:
My hon. Friend makes his purpose in asking that question entirely clear. I hope that we shall see some leadership on those issues from individuals who might, for spurious reasons, object to a Bill that I believe is in the interests of the people of this country.
Q3. Mr. Davidson:
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 11 June. [30915]
The Prime Minister:
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Davidson:
Does the Prime Minister accept that drug dealing and money laundering are major difficulties in this country? Is he aware that a Scottish newspaper reported at the weekend that a journalist had approached a major Scottish organisation and offered it money as a donation, and was advised how that money could be laundered? Is that not a particular cause of concern for all of us? Is it not of particular concern for the Prime Minister, when the organisation involved was the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party?
The Prime Minister:
This Government have taken more action against drug dealing and money laundering than any previous Government, and we continue to do so. I doubt that the hon. Gentleman's allegation has any
Q4. Mrs. Peacock:
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 11 June. [30916]
The Prime Minister:
I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.
Mrs. Peacock:
Will my right hon. Friend welcome the recent fall in unemployment, which is a sign of good economic management? Will he join me in congratulating Layeezee Beds in Batley, which recently recruited 60 new members to its work force because of demand for that company's products?
The Prime Minister:
I am delighted to hear that good news from my hon. Friend's constituency, which is reflected in many constituencies throughout the country. The economy is in better condition than at any time for a generation, which is why we were able to reduce interest rates yet again last week--simply because we have been successful in keeping inflation under control. Our policies are working, inflation is falling, unemployment is falling, growth is beginning to accelerate and this country has better economic circumstances than for many years past--and they are better than in many of our competitor countries on the continent.
Mr. Benn:
How can the Prime Minister justify disfranchising 116,000 voters in the election that he called in Northern Ireland when they voted for Sinn Fein, which is committed to the six Mitchell principles? When there
The Prime Minister:
Sinn Fein disfranchised itself. It had every opportunity to take part in the talks. Had there been an unconditional ceasefire by the IRA, Sinn Fein could have been a part of the talks process, as I had hoped it would be. Its representatives cannot sit down in a talks process with a bomb on the table and a gun under the table and the threat that, if they do not get their own way in negotiations, they will revert to type and the habits of the past 20 or 30 years. Sinn Fein's exclusion from the talks is its fault. That is the position of this Government, the Irish Government and the overwhelming majority of people in Northern Ireland, and that situation will not change. It is in Sinn Fein's hands. A ceasefire and the end of violence, which should have occurred anyhow, quite apart from the talks, and the way would be open for Sinn Fein to join the discussions.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |