HC Deb 26 April 1977 vol 930 cc1006-8
2. Mr. Goodhart

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make a further statement about the implementation of defence cuts.

Mr. Mulley

I have nothing to add to what was said in the 1977 Statement on the Defence Estimates—Cmnd. 6735—and what I subsequently told the House in the defence debate on 22nd March.

Mr. Goodhart

That was not very much However, as it is plain that following the Prime Minister's visit to BAOR the Government have no prospect of pressing offset agreement talks with the Germans with any degree of success, will the right hon. Gentleman now give an absolute assurance that the strength of BAOR will not be cut any further?

Mr. Mulley

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's view that there is no prospect of a successful offset negotiation. There are Questions about that later on the Order Paper. However, I repeat the assurance that has been given many times: we have no intention of reducing the size of BAOR pending what one would hope would be a successful out come of the mutual and balanced force reduction negotiations in Vienna.

Mr. Frank Allaun

Will the Secretary of State rebut and resist Lord Chalfont's propaganda in his long and biased BBC programme and in his article in The Times asking for still more arms spending? Instead, will my right hon. Friend tell NATO chiefs that he sticks by the Labour Party commitment at the General Election to cut our defence spending to the same proportion of gross national product as that of the other European NATO allies?

Mr. Mulley

I think that it would be asking too much if I had to rebut statements of all kinds by commentators in the Press, many of which are contradictory. I am afraid that my attendance at the House deprives me of the opportunity of seeing a number of television programmes. I have seen the article in question. However, I think that our position in NATO is well known, and I do not need to elaborate on it now.

Sir Ian Gilmour

No one requires the Secretary of State to rebut the comments of Lord Chalfont. What people require the Secretary of State to do is to rebut his own Left wing a bit. However, in view of the very damaging effect that next year's proposed cuts will have on our contribution to NATO, will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House a little more about what consultations he intends to have with NATO before those cuts are decided upon?

Mr. Mulley

I have already informed the House that it is our intention, after the conclusion of the full review that is now taking place as to the best way of making the cuts—not in our actual expenditure but in our planned higher expenditure for 1978–79—to have full consultations. There will be nearly a year in which to consult, and, of course, both NATO and the House will be informed when we reach conclusions on the reduction of £230 million in the planned expenditure for 1978–79. We have already committed ourselves to NATO to have the fullest consultations.