Expenditure (Hansard, 15 April 1975)

§ 15. Mr. Cryer
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if the proportion of gross national product spent on defence will be reduced to the proportion of Great Britain's NATO allies if the GNP annual growth is less than 3 per cent.

§ Mr. Mason
Many factors could affect the position over the next 10 years, but we see no reason at this stage to change the long-term assumptions.

§ Mr. Cryer
Does not the present economic situation mean that further cuts in defence expenditure will have to be made if Labour Party policy is to be met? Will my right hon. Friend start by reviewing the contract to purchase Lance tactical nuclear weapons for £55 million? Does he not regard it as a disgrace that a Labour Government should be embarking on that sort of expenditure on these obscene weapons when money is urgently needed for schools and social services?

§ Mr. Mason
Whenever the question of public expenditure is discussed, it must be remembered that it is a matter of national concern. I suppose that defence will have to play its part as on previous occasions. I must inform my hon. Friend and the House that we are going ahead with the purchase of Lance tactical nuclear weapons in place of Honest John, and that we shall have tactical nuclear weapons in Western Europe so as not to escalate from conventional defence right through to the horror of using the strategic deterrent.

§ Mr. Onslow
Will the right hon. Gentleman reaffirm his assurance to the House that the cuts that he has introduced are, in my view, once-and-for-all cuts and not just precursors of further progressive cuts year by year? Will he take it from us that we are not interested in disarmament by inflation or by deflation and that we want to see this country possessing adequate defences against the enemies which we face, to which the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) seems to be either indifferent or blind?

§ Mr. Mason
Yes, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the test of our defence spending is whether it guarantees our security. It is on that that we rest.

§ Mr. Wellbeloved
Does my right hon. Friend consider it appropriate to publish the gross national product spent on defence by non-aligned countries? Is he aware that non-aligned Sweden, which has not fought a war for over 100 years and which has had the benefit of a Socialist Government for nearly 50 years, finds it necessary for the maintenance of peace and the defence of freedom to spend more, expressed as a percentage of its GNP, than does the United Kingdom?

§ Mr. Mason
Yes. Of course, my hon. Friend has answered his own question. If he wishes to pursue the matter in detail, I shall be only too pleased to give him full replies.

§ Mr. Fairbairn
Will the Minister note—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is delaying the Prime Minister's Questions.

§ Mr. Fairbairn
Will the Minister note that the moment when the hon. Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) asks for the abolition of the obscene nuclear weapon 266 and the moment when the hon. Member for Moray and Nairn (Mrs. Ewing) says that there has been a marriage between the Scottish National Party and the STUC with a view to this country having no nuclear weapons is the very moment when nuclear submarines from the Soviet Government are circling the Scottish oil rigs?

§ Mr. Mason
No. On perusing the hon. and learned Gentleman's dress, whether it be Palmerstonian, Disraelian or Asquithian, the answer is that the Russians in perusing the rigs are either curious or jealous.