§ 17. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total cost of American equipment for the Armed Forces of the Crown delivered during the 12 months ended 30th November, 1968, compared with 12 months ended 30th November, 1964; and what is the value of planned acceptances of United States equipment for 12 months ending 30th November, 1969.
§ Mr. John MorrisI regret that information in the form requested is not available. The amount paid from Defence Votes for American equipment in 1964–65 has been estimated at £21 million. The figure for 1968–69 is now estimated at £90 million.
§ Sir G. NabarroAt a time when everyone in this country is being squeezed for imports by the import deposit scheme, is it proper that the Government should be spending vastly increased sums on American equipment, the great bulk of which could be produced in this country with a little intelligence and foresight?
§ Mr. MorrisIf we had gone on with the plans of the Conservative Administration, which the hon. Gentleman supported and which we inherited, we would have had a much larger Polaris and Phantom force and the deliveries would have been at their peak this year. Therefore, the total dollar bill for 1968–69 would have been much heavier. In addition, we would have been paying vastly greater sums on aircraft and equipment at home as well.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingCan the hon. Gentleman say why imports of military aircraft which are paid for in dollars are not included in the balance of payments figures for this country?
§ Mr. MorrisThat is a matter for the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but it is clear how it is dealt with.
§ 24. Mr. Dalyellasked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will give details of his plan to purchase $1,000 million of arms from the United States of America over the next 10 years.
§ Mr. John MorrisThere is no plan such as my hon. Friend seems to have in mind. As he well knows, it is not the practice to give detailed forecasts of expenditure beyond the current financial year.
§ Mr. DalyellImmediately, then, can, the exact nature of offset agreements be made public?
§ Mr. MorrisIf my hon. Friend will put down a particular question on offset agreements I will try to answer it. But, as he knows, the present offset agreement has worked remarkably well, despite cancellation of the F.111, and we are at the same time making strenuous efforts to increase sales of equipment to the United States.
§ Sir G. NabarroIs the figure of £90 million for purchases of American equipment during 1969 after taking into account offset supplies to the United States of America, or before?
§ Mr. MorrisThe question which I have answered refers directly to the matters about which the hon. Gentleman asked, what were these sales—
§ Sir G. NabarroAnswer the question.—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
§ Mr. MorrisThe arrogance of the hon. Gentleman is very unbecoming. I have sought to answer him already, and I have done so in the terms of the question he asked.
§ Mr. RamsdenSurely the Minister can do a little more to help the House? My hon. Friend asked a perfectly clear question. Has not the Minister the information to give the House in answer to it?
§ Mr. MorrisI have made it clear to the House that the question asked by the hon. Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro) was primarily related to the question of arms that we had bought from the United States. The answer referred directly to the question asked by the hon. Gentleman.