§ 13. Mr. Evelyn Kingasked the Minister of State for Defence what type of ship is currently employed in the Beira Patrol, and whether he has considered the use of fewer men or smaller ships, or diminished hours of alertness; and if, in view of the shortage of frigates, he will make a statement.
§ Mr. KirkWe do not give details of such deployments, but they do not include ships smaller than frigates. The principal reasons for this are that smaller ships would not have the necessary speed or sea-keeping qualities to perform the patrol effectively and would require base support or a support ship which is not available in the area.
§ Mr. KingIs it not well known that all the oil comes up the other way and that this force has no function at all? If, for curious reasons, we must have a force dedicated to not stopping the oil, why cannot we have a smaller force not stopping it? Would not three men in a 602 boat not stop the oil as efficiently as three frigates?
§ Mr. KirkThe oil comes up the other way because the patrol works. It cannot go in through Beira. All that we are required to do by the United Nations is to blockade the port of Beira.
§ Mr. NormantonIs my hon. Friend unaware that not only the men who man the boats but people throughout the country have the feeling that this exercise, which we are perpetuating, is completely futile?
§ Mr. KirkThat is clearly a matter for my right: hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.
§ Mr. WellbelovedIs the hon. Gentleman in a position to state the date on which the Government intend to stop the Beira. Patrol and whether that is their policy?
§ 16. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Minister of State for Defence what is now the running cost of the Beira Patrol, including expenditure by the Royal Air Force.
§ Mr. KirkThe annual extra cost of maintaining the Beira Patrol continues at about £400,000, mainly attributable to aircraft support costs.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonDoes that answer mean that we are now spending less on achieving nothing? Will the Ministry of Defence consult the Foreign Office, because the Foreign Secretary is to visit Lisbon and it is hardly conducive to good relations that this activity, which is incompatible with the alliance, should be continued?
§ Mr. KirkThe answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary is that the extra cost remains roughly the same. The answer to the second part is that he should put down a Question to my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.
§ Mr. George ThomsonIs the hon. Gentleman aware that the kind of questions which have been put to him by his back benchers do this country's reputation no good at all abroad and denigrate 603 the very effective operation carried out by the Royal Navy?
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterDoes my hon. Friend recall that, in reply to a supplementary on Queston 13, he referred to us as being "required" by the United Nations to maintain this patrol? On reflection, does he confirm that that is the right word?
§ Mr. KirkAs I understand the position—this again should be confirmed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office—this is a mandatory resolution of the Security Council.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonOn a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg leave to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.