§ 5. Mr. Geoffrey Johnson Smithasked the Secretary of State for Defence what effect the recent defence review will have on the percentage of the defence budget spent on research and development.
§ Mr. PattieIt is too early to give the Government's decisions on reshaping the defence programme. These are being translated into detailed plans, including the size and shape of our future research and development effort.
§ Mr. Johnson SmithIs my hon. Friend satisfied that we are getting value for money in research and development, bearing in mind that for many years, under different Administrations, we have been spending a greater proportion of our military budget on R and D than even the United States?
§ Mr. PattieIt is very difficult always to be certain that all of the money being spent on research and development is giving us full value. However, we are keeping this matter under close review, and, following the recent White Paper, it has been the subject of further studies. I am taking a strong personal interest in it.
§ Mr. DormandDoes the Minister agree that one of the most important aspects of development is the continued 151 existence of the Air Training Corps? In those circumstances, what possible justification can there be for combining the Durham wing of the ATC with the Northumberland ATC? Is the Minister aware of the tradition and enthusiasm of the Durham ATC? Does he agree that financial savings would be negligible? Will he reconsider that decision?
§ Mr. PattieMuch as I have sympathy with the hon. Gentleman, following the recent ministerial reorganisation that is not a matter which is properly for me. I admire the hon. Gentleman's ingenuity in managing to introduce the subject of the Air Training Corps under the question of research and development.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The Minister ought to congratulate me.
§ Mr. Robert AtkinsIn view of the declining percentage of the defence budget spent on production technology in this country compared with that of the United States, Japan, France and Germany, when does the Minister expect to be able to announce proposals along the lines of the American Government—for example, to spend money in defence industries on production technology?
§ Mr. PattieMy hon. Friend and I have corresponded on this important question and, as I have told him previously, this is also the subject of further studies. I do not in any way minimise the importance of production technology, and I hope that we shall be making an announcement in the not-too-distant future.
§ Mr. JohnWill not the Government's announcement regarding Royal ordnance factories and their proposals for them have the effect of cutting defence R and D? Will the Minister be less coy about the White Paper and quote some figures or percentages as to how the White Paper will affect R and D? As yet, we have had no figures of any kind relating to that White Paper.
§ Mr. PattieAs I said in my original answer—which the hon. Gentleman may not have heard—we have not yet worked out the full implications for the research and development budget of the defence programme, because we considered that it was important to get the central programme structured first. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's other point that any question of the future reorganisation of the Royal ordnance factories will necessarily mean that there will be any reduction in overall R and D.