HC Deb 29 July 1963 vol 682 cc19-22
25. Mr. Cronin

asked the Minister of Aviation when he expects his headquarters to be accommodated in the same building as the Ministry of Defence.

Mr. J. Amery

I am not in a position to make a statement.

Mr. Cronin

In view of the contents of the White Paper, is it not a highly unsatisfactory arrangement that the Minister of Aviation should be in the same building as the Minister of Defence, bearing in mind the Minister's multitudinous responsibilities to Civil Aviation? Is is not unsatisfactory that he should be incarcerated in a building devoted completely to defence matters and at the beck and call of Ministers senior to himself and dealing with defence matters?

Mr. Amery

It has been the Government's view that, on balance, the advantages of propinquity between the Defence Ministry and the senior echelons of the Ministry of Aviation would outweigh any administrative disruption which would result from the separation of the Minister of Aviation from some of his staff.

Mr. Cronin

Having regard to the deplorable state of affairs which civil aviation has got into during the last few years, particularly the situation of B.O.A.C., on which hon. Members have asked Questions this afternoon, is it not desirable that propinquity should be considered much more in regard to civil aviation than to military matters?

Mr. Amery

As the hon. Gentleman knows, there is a serious problem resulting from some of the slippages in time and cost where defence projects have been concerned, and it has been felt that this might be overcome if the senior staff on that side of the Ministry of Aviation were in closer touch with the Ministry of Defence.

Sir A. V. Harvey

Some of us view this proposed arrangement with some alarm and concern, and we are surprised that my right hon. Friend does not feel the same about it. Does he realise that even by moving into the building this is the thin end of the wedge, and will he resist this as much as possible?

Mr. Amery

This decision of the Government has been matured at some length. We have been into the pros and cons and this has been, on balance, the advice which the Government have felt bound to tender to the House.

27. Sir J. Eden

asked the Minister of Aviation what is the number of personnel employed in his Department concerned with electronics, space and civil aviation, respectively; and what changes in the management of these sections will be made as a result of the proposed move to the new Ministry of Defence.

Mr. J. Amery

The numbers at 1st July of this year were: Electronics 4,545, Space 291 and Civil Aviation 7,873. It is not intended that the proposed move should lead to any changes in the management of the sections to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Sir J. Eden

Do not the figures in my right hon. Friend's reply indicate that his Department has an extremely important rôle to play in the technological progress and export potential of British industry? Would he agree that, while propinquity in defence may be desirable, complete immersion is not?

Mr. Amery

My hon. Friend has put his ringer on a difficulty, but we shall do our very best to overcome it.

Mr. Healey

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea of the approximate percentage of his total personnel likely to be moving to the Ministry of Defence under the proposed reorganisation?

Mr. Amery

The hon. Member will realise that accommodation is a matter which arouses the fiercest heart-burnings in Departments. There are no fewer than five Departments which will be in part accommodated in the new building. I think that it would be unwise for me to try to give an answer to that supplementary question at this stage.

Sir H. Legge-Bourke

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, wherever these excellent experts live, the most important thing is that there should be a general speeding up of decision-taking and that the decisions themselves should be right? Is he satisfied that this proposed move will contribute to either of these two things?

Mr. Amery

We must do our best to make sure that it does.

Mr. P. Williams

Is my right hon. Friend aware that some of us on this side of the House feel very strongly about his move to the Ministry of Defence? Will he give an undertaking that he will use his office there more as an annexe than as the place for doing the real work, which is in the Ministry itself?

Mr. Amery

I will certainly take steps to keep in the closest touch with my Department and its officials.

Mr. Lee

How does the right hon. Gentleman propose to comply with the White Paper? He talked about those who are engaged on defence. Is it not the case that a number of the people to whom he has referred are sometimes engaged on defence and sometimes not? Should not the rest be somewhere near? Where do the Government propose to put them—in Parliament Square, or somewhere like that? Where is "near"?

Mr. Amery

It is the intention that they should be accommodated closer to the Ministry of Defence than they are now, but I am not prepared to say in which building.