§ 31. Mr. Emrys Hughesasked the Secretary of State for Defence in view of the need for setting an example in the reduc- 228 tion of public expenditure, what further proposals he has for reducing expenditure on H.M.S. "Britannia".
§ Mr. FoleyI have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Gentleman on 22nd January, 1968; I also refer to my statement during the debate on the Navy Estimates on 12th March.—[Vol. 757, c. 40–1.]
§ Mr. HughesIf my hon. Friend cannot add anything, could he not at least subtract something from the £9,000 a week of the British taxpayers' money being spent unnecessarily? Is he aware that during its voyage in Scottish waters it cost the country £15,000 to take a Royal personage on something that was really a holiday? Will he not consider whether this ship should not be sold to America, where it would get a sum which could be used to build several advance factories?
§ Mr. FoleyAs I said in the debate in March, the cost of Britannia is the minimum necessary to maintain her readiness for a wartime role as a hospital ship and to play her part on Royal occasions. Since then, the Royal Yacht as been used for a number of naval exercises and manoeuvres and we are examining further possibilities of utilising her crew when she is in port.
§ Sir A. V. HarveyFor the benefit of newer Members of this House, will the hon. Gentleman confirm that this vessel was ordered by the Attlee Government in the immediate post-war years? Why are some hon. Members opposite always complaining about it when statesmen like Marshal Tito, Colonel Nasser and the King of Norway have similar vessels? Why are they so petty and niggling? Why cannot they look at bigger things?
§ Mr. HughesIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.