HC Deb 22 February 1977 vol 926 cc1201-4
3. Mr. Pattie

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what are the Government's plans regarding the Nimrod airborne early warning project.

Mr. Mulley

No conclusions have yet been reached about the NATO AEW programme and therefore no decision has been made about the future of the Nimrod AEW project, development of which is continuing in the meantime. Following the December meeting of the NATO Defence Planning Committee there have been recent meetings of financial experts, and I expect to have further discussions with Defence Ministers shortly.

Mr. Pattie

Is the Minister aware that the Government's decision in principle to buy the AWAC system is extremely hard to justify, except on the emphemeral basis of a NATO-wide purchase? The system is more expensive than Nimrod, it is in no way superior, it will not be ready soon, and it will generate only 450 jobs compared with the 7,500 that would be generated by the British Nimrod

Mr. Mulley

The decision in principle to seek a NATO-based early warning system was taken two years ago, and it would be immensely to the advantage of the Alliance and the defence of this country if early warning against low flying aircraft was NATO-wide. It was for these considerations that we agreed to go along with the NATO scheme if one could be arrived at. There is no question of this country buying the Boeing AWACS. If we have to make national provision for our NATO tasks in the Eastern Atlantic we shall have to fall back on the Nimrod. That is why we have kept our options open.

Mr. McNamara

May I underline the important employment provisions of this project? The British aircraft industry is facing severe cutbacks, and in my constituency, where there is already high unemployment, the problems will be aggravated if Nimrod is not accepted by NATO as a cheaper and more effective early warning system.

Mr. Mulley

Unhappily, there is no prospect at all of NATO taking the Nimrod alternative for the whole Alliance, because Nimrod is for military requirements which are different from those needed for the whole NATO territory. Either there will be a collective NATO scheme, or alternatively, we shall have to make national provision. I am well aware of the job position. We have brought forward an order for more Hawker Harriers, and that should assist my hon. Friend's constituents.

Mr. Goodhart

Does the Secretary of State ever feel a twinge of conscience when he is lecturing his NATO colleagues about the desirability of buying this expensive system at a time when we are planning to slash our own defence forces?

Mr. Mulley

I never seek to lecture anyone on any subject, but the provision of an airborne early warning system—whatever system is adopted—is extremely expensive. But provision against low flying aircraft is a very high military priority.

Mr. MacFarquhar

Will the Defence Secretary change his practice of not lecturing people by uttering some short, sharp words to the German Minister of Defence if the newspaper reports are true that the Germans intend to pull the rug from under the AWAC project and then put the blame on us? If we are going for Nimrod let us go for it, and put the blame on the country on which it belongs.

Mr. Mulley

It is never easy to put the blame where we would like to see it rest. I have very good personal relations with the distinguished German Defence Minister, Herr Leber. I do not wish to have sharp words with him and I do not think that he has occasion to have sharp words with me.

Mr. Churchill

Is the Secretary of State aware that already there has been too much delay in the choice of a successor airborne warning aircraft to the Shackle-ton? The Government have been stalling for 15 months. The arguments are strongly in favour of the British project, and we could have twice as many airborne warning aircraft if we opted to buy British. At least they could be in service as quickly as the Boeing AWACs, and would provide employment for 7,500 people compared with only 450. Will he undertake to come to a firm decision in favour of the British project by next month if there has not been a NATO decision by then?

Mr. Mulley

It is very odd that the hon. Member for Stretford (Mr. Churchill) one week charges me with not consulting with our NATO Allies, and the next he criticises me because they have spent 15 months on this very important project. For me to take a unilateral decision when the whole matter is under discussion in NATO is a negation of the doctrine that the hon. Member was preaching in the recent debate.

Mr. Pattie

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Secretary of State's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.