§ Q1. Mr. Sheldonasked the Prime Minister if he will set up a committee to inquire into the most appropriate methods of costing within Government Departments concerned with defence matters.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)No, Sir. I am satisfied that the new functional costing system is on the right lines though my right hon. Friends and I are always willing to consider suggestions for improvement.
§ Mr. SheldonIs my right hon. Friend aware that the Ministry of Defence, for technical reasons, is unable to provide information on the total cost of our commitments east of Suez and that, without it, wrong decisions may well be taken? Would my right hon. Friend look into this again and see what might be done?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that my hon. Friend has it right. There has been over a year or two a great improvement in the cost-effective system. I have had the opportunity of seeing some of this work in the Ministry of Defence. It has greatly improved over the last year or two, and particularly over the last few months. It certainly is not the case that we are unable to get a costing of, not only individual weapons, but individual parts of military expenditure. I should like to consider whether, without any breach of security, it would be possible for one of my hon. Friends in the Department to indicate to my hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. Sheldon) something of the work being done, which is quite impressive.
§ Sir C. OsborneWould not the Prime Minister agree that what the nation requires most is not a better analysis of Government expenditure, whether it be in defence or anything else, but a reduction in Government expenditure? Will the right hon. Gentleman have a look at that?
§ The Prime MinisterI am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his promise of support. He did not show it in his votes on certain aircraft debates which we had very recently. In order to get the most effective defence system within a given level of cost, it is right to have the kind of analysis for which my hon. Friend asks. The position is, as the hon. Gentleman knows, that the defence programme, as we took it over, would inevitably escalate at 1964 prices to £2,400 million, arid more than that if no changes are made. We intend to get it very substantially below that figure and, therefore, we must have some method of cost-effective analysis to get it down to that figure. Therefore, the hon. Gentleman is wrong, but we look forward to his support when we get vie Opposition censure Motion about it.