HC Deb 22 March 1977 vol 928 cc1063-4
9. Mr. Maurice Macmillan

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether units of the Royal Navy will be able to operate safely in those parts of the Atlantic which are outside the range of effective aircover by the RAF when HMS "Ark Royal" is withdrawn.

Mr. Duffy

We believe that our arrangements for defence of the Fleet against air attack after HMS "Ark Royal" is withdrawn from service will be satisfactory.

Mr. Macmillan

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that whereas we shall have no aircraft carriers the Soviet Union is building three, and has air bases in Southern Africa? Does he accept that this means that it will be impossible to defend the sea routes carrying essential raw materials using British ships, British aircraft and British forces without relying on our allies?

Mr. Duffy

No. Though I understand the right hon. Gentleman's contention, I cannot accept his underlying argument. The Phantom and Buccaneer aircraft of HMS "Ark Royal" will continue to be employed in a maritime rôle from ashore. Moreover, land-based aircraft can operate in the former sea areas of NATO through which all the supply and reinforcement shipping from North America must pass. Apart from land-based aircraft, we are introducing a number of very effective air defence systems into the Fleet.

Mr. Alan Lee Williams

Will the Minister confirm that organic air defence is no longer essential, because of modern developments?

Mr. Duffy

Yes, my hon. Friend is quite right. Our concept of defence provides us with aircraft to attack or disrupt missile launching vehicles—the Sea Dart for medium-range defence, the Sea Wolf for shorter-range defence and the Sea Harrier which adds a complementary quick reaction capability.

Any warlike operation in the NATO area would be integrated with the NATO forces. Therefore, apart from RAF land-based aircraft and our own organic defences RN ships would receive aircraft support from other nations, which might well include United States shipborne aircraft.

Mr. Churchill

Will the Minister cease being so complacent about this matter? Is he not aware that the single most significant new factor in this situation has been the deployment at bases in the Crimea and the South-West of the Soviet Union of 100 supersonic Backfire bombers? These pose a great threat to the territorial land mass of Western Europe and particularly to the shipping routes which are vital to us. Is he satisfied that we should be assisting the extension of the range of the Backfire bomber with Lucas and Plessey contracts?

Mr. Duffy

The hon. Member mistakes complacency for informed knowledge of the Fleet's capability and deep confidence in its ability to deploy that capability.