§ 1. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will now make a further statement regarding the shortage of personnel, in total, in the three Armed Forces of the Crown at 1st April, 1970; and whether the figure of 11,000 estimated at 1st April, 1970, relates to the same total service establishment as extant on 1st April, 1969.
§ The Minister of Defence for Administration (Mr. Roy Hattersley)The total requirement for trained male officers and other ranks fell by about 9,000 during the period.
§ Sir G. NabarroYes, but the hon. Gentleman still evades answering the Question which I have put to him twice. Do the figures for the total establishment of the three Armed Forces at the end of 1969 correspond exactly to the total establishment at the end of 1970, and do the respective shortages for those two dates, given as 9,900 and 11,000 respectively, both appertain to the same total establishment figure or to different establishment figures?
§ Mr. HattersleyI understand the hon. Gentleman's Question. I understood it when he asked me a month ago. I answered it then, and I have answered it today.
§ Sir G. NabarroThe hon. Gentleman has not.
§ Mr. HattersleyThe establishment which we regard as the trained necessity fell during the year by the figure I have quoted. That is the simple and absolutely straightforward answer to the hon. Gentleman's Question.
§ Mr. RamsdenI think that it would help the House and save me a later supplementary question if the hon. Gentleman would give the comparative percentage shortfall in establishments in the two years.
§ Mr. HattersleyI shall give those figures in a Written Answer if the right hon. 378 Gentleman puts down a Question. It is a complicated matter to define the requirements for trained strength, bearing in mind other matters. There is no reason why one would want to keep the information from the House. It is a matter of not wishing to give a long-winded answer if the right hon. Gentleman asked a longwinded question.
§ 17. Mr. Hooleyasked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the current ratio of civilian, non-industrial and industrial to military personnel employed by or serving in the defence forces; and what increase or decline there has been in this ratio since 1964.
§ Mr. HattersleyThe ratio of civilian employees of the Ministry of Defence to military personnel in the Services has gone down from 0.87 to 1 in 1964 to a current figure of 0.84 to 1.
§ Mr. HooleyI welcome that answer in general terms, but will my right hon Friend explain why, in that case, the number of civilian scientists employed by his Department has gone up by 6 per cent., with a net increase of 360, in the past five years, according to information supplied to me by his Department? Will he explain this in the light of the publicised reduction in the military research effort?
§ Mr. HattersleyThe answer is that during the period of reduction there has also been a period of increasing sophistication of our defence capability, which naturally calls for additional scientists.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingIs not the improved ratio due to the fact that the Government have cut the teeth arms and uniformed services without cutting the civilian staff to the same extent?
§ Mr. HattersleyNo, that is absolutely wrong, and if the hon. Gentleman will read Annexes E and F of the current statement on defence expenditure he will see how wrong he is.
§ 22. Sir Ian Orr-Ewingasked the Secretary of State for Defence what were the final recruiting figures for the financial year 1969–70; and what is the current shortfall to the latest date for all three Services.
§ Mr. HattersleyFinal recruiting figures for the financial year 1969–70 are not yet 379 available. Provisional totals are about 35,250 male other ranks, making a shortfall of about 12,400.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingIn view of the very alarming shortfall of 12,400 recruits, would it not be wise for the Government to seek to stop the forced rundown of forces, and the non-voluntary redundancy which is particularly being forced on the Fleet Air Arm, until such time as recruiting improves?
§ Mr. HattersleyThe hon. Gentleman should consider the figure of shortfall with some caution. It has largely resulted from recruiting failures in previous years which produced a cumulative shortfall. The recruiting figure last year is, we believe, about 7,000 better than in the previous year, and the indications are that this improvement will continue.
§ Sir Ian Orr-EwingOn a point of order. Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply to this Question and the earlier Questions on redundancy, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment on an early occasion.