HC Deb 04 March 1970 vol 797 cc391-3
15. Mr. Onslow

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether a decision has yet been taken on the re-sparring of the Royal Air Force's Pembroke aircraft.

37 and 43. Mr. Woodnutt

asked the Minister of Defence (1) how the delivery dates of14 Britten-Norman Islanders compare with the time required to rebuild 14 Pembrokes; what is the aggregate amount of levy receivable by the Government in respect of a sale of 14 Islanders; and what is the estimated life of a new Islander compared with the estimated life of a rebuilt Pembroke;

(2) why he proposes to meet the needs of the Royal Air Force by re-sparring Pembrokes instead of purchasing modern Islanders; and what are the relative costs of rebuilding Pembrokes and purchasing Islanders and the relative operating costs of the two aircraft.

Mr. John Morris

We have decided that the needs of the Royal Air Force will be best met by re-sparring the Pembroke.

Fourteen Islanders would have been available some six months earlier than re-sparred Pembrokes. It is difficult to estimate aircraft life precisely. From the engineering point of view the Islander would probably last longer but this has to be set against the greater suitability of the Pembroke for the R.A.F's tasks. The estimated cost of re-sparring the Pembroke will be marginally less than buying an equivalent number of Islanders; but the estimated running costs will be slightly higher.

On the question of levy, I have nothing to add to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Technology on 26th February.—[Vol. 796, c. 407.]

Mr. Onslow

If the hon. Gentleman has ever taken a sillier decision, will he say what it is?

Mr. Woodnutt

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise the importance to our exporters of being able to claim that their products are in use by the British armed Services? Will he bear in mind the very marginal difference between the two aircraft—the obsolete Pembroke and the modern Islander? Cannot he consider this again and at least satisfy the requirement in part with Islanders and in part with Pembrokes?

Mr. Morris

I am grateful for the much more reasonable question of the hon. Member, compared to that of his hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow), who obviously was not listening to my answer—

Sir Knox Cunningham

Answer both.

Mr. Morris

I will, with pleasure. Before a decision was reached, I and my advisers considered the options open to us. I have set out in the answer, to which the hon. Member for Woking was not listening, some of the advantages of one and some of the advantages of the other. I have set them out fairly and squarely. We came to the conclusion that the most satisfactory decision was the one I have already announced.