§ 20. Mr. John Morrisasked the Minister of State for Defence if he will make a statement on current defence equipment expenditure and on the economies now envisaged.
§ Mr. Ian GilmourAs I said in answer to a Question by the right hon. and learned Gentleman on 22nd November, it is too early to make a reliable assessment of the expenditure on defence equipment that will take place in the current year. So far as economies in the future years are concerned, I am not yet in a position to give details of how the defence contribution of £178 million towards the savings in public expenditure next year announced yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be made up.—[Vol. 864, c. 492.]
§ Mr. MorrisAs the Minister, on his own confession, has little idea where the £178 million cut in defence expenditure is to be made, and as it is as a figure no more than one plucked from the air to placate the Treasury, will he reconsider the galloping expenditure on research and development which in 1970 was £222 million and which in the current year is £418 million, an increase of over £100 million in the same figure 1134 terms over two years? Will he try to deploy some of that research and development capability in tackling the needs of fuel supply?
§ Mr. GilmourThe right hon. and learned Gentleman was not quite fair in his earlier remarks. I said that we had not yet settled the final details of where the cuts will land. We know that £16 million will come from capital expenditure and the rest from procurement.
The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that a lot of research and development goes on the MRCA and sophisticated weapon equipment. Obviously that is a matter to which we should pay attention. It is not something which we can scrap or cut savagely without serious consequences elsewhere.
§ Dame Irene WardWill my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I think it is much more important that defence expenditure should be maintained and that the additional saving which is now very necessary from the Government's point of view might be made elsewhere? Further, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind how excited I am to hear so many Labour Members suddenly coming down in favour of defence? It is most exciting, and we should give them every chance to have all the defence which is necessary.
§ Mr. GilmourI share my hon. Friend's excitement. Of course, no Department likes being cut. The Ministry of Defence likes the cuts no more than does my hon. Friend. However, in a time of great national emergency defence must make its contribution.
§ Mr. PeartIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Member for Tyne-mouth (Dame Irene Ward) has expressed a view which is held by certain Opposition Members and that it will be interesting to see whether the hon. Lady votes against her own Government on this matter.
§ Dame Irene WardNo, that would not help.
§ Mr. PeartAll I say is that the Opposition believe in adequate defence consistent with the strength of our economy which has been weakened by the present Government. However, when the right hon. Gentleman makes his decision will 1135 he undertake to produce a White Paper spelling out the details?
§ Mr. GilmourIn view of the prelogemenon given by the right hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Peart), it will be very interesting to see his own attitude to his party's defence policy. There is a defence White Paper coming out very shortly. We do not propose to publish two.
§ Mr. ChurchillFaced with these cuts, which will affect his Department, will my right hon. Friend do everything in his power to ensure that the absolute minimum possible is cut from equipment which has been squeezed in successive defence reviews to the point where the defence posture of our Armed Forces in terms of numbers of aircraft and tanks is grossly inadequate?
§ Mr. GilmourObviously we shall make the cuts in the least painful way we can, but I must tell my hon. Friend that the equipment programme cannot escape.