HC Deb 13 January 1976 vol 903 cc193-6
4. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what is his approximate estimate of the cost of the 185 RAF planes proposed as a variant to the multi-role combat aircraft; what is the present stage of their design; and if, for financial and technical reasons, he will cancel the project.

The Minister of State for Defence (Mr. William Rodgers)

Project definition studies of the air defence variant of the MRCA have just been completed and the results, which include estimated costs, are currently being assessed. A decision to proceed to full development has yet to be taken.

Mr. Allaun

If proceeded with, would not this project inevitably add to the estimated £2 billion cost of the MRCA? Would not the abandonment of the MRCA project produce most of the defence cuts required, and are not manned aircraft vulnerable to ground-to-air missiles?

Mr. Rodgers

My hon. Friend has asked three questions and the answer to all of them is "No". If he believes in the air defence of Britain he must indicate what his alternative would be were we to abandon the air defence variant. He is right in saying that missiles are important, but they are also very expensive. He must face the fact that there is no easy way of ensuring the defence of this country on the cheap.

Mr. Pattie

If the air defence variant of the MRCA, which the RAF wants very much, is cancelled, will it not have the effect of increasing the cost of the basic MRCA, and will that not eventually lead to pressure for it to be replaced by an American aeroplane?

Mr. Rodgers

There is a fair possibility that if the air defence variant were cancelled the whole programme would fall to the ground. Far from that being a matter for us to rejoice over, it would create very severe problems. All the evidence at our disposal suggests that there is no way of ensuring the air defence of Britain more cheaply than by the present proposals.

Mr. Conlan

I do not go along with the idea that the MRCA should be cancelled, but is my right hon. Friend convinced that the air defence variant is necessary for our forces when our collaborative partners have decided against it?

Mr. Rodgers

That is a very fair question, but my hon. Friend must accept that our needs in defending these islands are somewhat different from the needs of our allies in NATO on the Continent of Europe. In addition, the air defence variant is meant to succeed the Phantoms, which have been in service with the RAF for a number of years. The Phantoms in service with the German Air Force, for example, have only lately been delivered and are likely to last another 10 years.

Mr. Tebbit

Does the right hon. Gentleman know why the jobs of men who make aeroplanes are of less importance to Left-wingers like the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Allaun) than the jobs of men who make motor cars?

Mr. Rodgers

I do not believe that the jobs of men, whatever they make, are unimportant to my hon. Friends. It is fair, however, to bear in mind that any substantial cuts in the equipment programme of Her Majesty's Forces will have grave consequences for employment. I am not suggesting that this problem should not be faced, but it is hypocrisy to suggest that it will not exist.

Mr. Tinn

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the MRCA promises to be one of the best bargains the Royal Air Force has ever bought? Will he say a little more about the consequences not just to the capability of the Royal Air Force but to potential foreign exchange earnings from sales of this aircraft if it were cancelled? Will he also look at the other side of the question—at the cost across the exchanges of our purchasing foreign aircraft, which would presumably be required at some stage?

Mr. Rodgers

I agree that the MRCA has been a remarkable success story in terms of collaboration so far. The cost estimates that were initially made in 1969 have been kept to remarkably well, allowing for inflation and changes in exchange rates. It is certainly the case that to cancel the MRCA and buy a foreign aircraft the total cost would be greater, and the cost across the exchanges would be very great indeed. That would be so irrespective of any possible export earnings from the MRCA.

15. Mr. Tebbit

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a further statement on the progress of the MRCA programme.

Mr. William Rodgers

Six prototype aircraft are now flying. The development programme is going well and we expect to be ready in the first half of this year to take a decision, with our partners, on the launching of full production.

Mr. Tebbit

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are greatly encouraged by the progress being made on this project? Does he recall that earlier today he told the House that cancellation of the air defence variant version of the MRCA would bring down the whole project? Does he agree, there- fore, that if he gives the go-ahead to the basic MRCA version he will at that same moment be giving an irrevocable go-ahead to the ADV version as well, otherwise his earlier words are nonsense?

Mr. Rodgers

That was a somewhat perverse question, and I confess that I did not altogether follow it. But I make it clear again that any substantial erosion of the kind of programme that we have had in mind could endanger the programme as a whole and considerably alter our plans, which we could then meet only at greater cost.