§ 2. Mr. Trotterasked the Secretary of State for Defence whether, in view of the fact that the defence cuts undertaken in 1975 reduce the strength of the Royal Navy to the lowest level since 1895, he will give an assurance that no further cuts are intended to the service.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Navy (Mr. Frank Judd)As the hon. Member will know, the most significant European Navy within the NATO Alliance, the Royal Navy, possesses more sophisticated technology and packs more punch than it has done throughout its history. We are determined to maintain our force levels and operational effectiveness as declared to NATO last year; any forthcoming economies will therefore certainly not be in the sharp end.
§ Mr. TrotterCan the Minister deny that the cuts being made in the Navy will 208 reduce manpower to its lowest level for 80 years at a time when the potential threat from the ever-growing Soviet Navy is far worse than that which faced us before the Kaiser's War or Hitler's War?
§ Mr. JuddIn view of the hon. Gentleman's continuing interest in naval affairs, I am sure he will agree that capability is more important than comparison of numbers of personnel. He will also know that in the past year or 18 months there has been a significant story of new equipment for the Navy, including confirmation of the cruiser, Sea Harrier, Sub-Warpoon, Sea Skua and the new special defence force for the North Sea.
§ Mr. George RodgersDoes my hon. Friend agree that it is somewhat misleading to refer to defence cuts, because during the next two years expenditure in real terms will increase? Is it not a fact that our contribution to the NATO Alliance is now the highest of any member?
§ Mr. JuddAs my hon. Friend knows, we plan real cuts in defence expenditure in the future. In our manifesto we said that those cuts must be looked at over a number of years and that we shall achieve a significant reduction in expenditure over a number of years.