§ 7. Mr. Parryasked the Secretary of State for Defence what recent representations he has received concerning defence expenditure.
§ Mr. HeseltineI frequently receive representations on several aspects of defence spending.
§ Mr. ParryThe spending of billions of pounds on nuclear weapons of death and destruction is to be deprecated while we are closing hospitals and slashing services for the sick and disabled. Is not the sum of £30 million which the Liverpool city council is rightly reclaiming from the Government to defend jobs and services——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is not relating his question to defence expenditure.
§ Mr. ParryWhat I am saying is that it is peanuts compared with the £17,000 million spent on defence.
§ Mr. HeseltineThe first priority of every Government must be the defence of the nation. It is important that the hon. Gentleman should remind his constituents that in 1984–85 more money will be spent on health and personal social services than on defence, and that social security spending will be over twice that of the defence budget.
§ Mr. ChurchillWould my right hon. Friend be able to provide a very small amount from the defence budget this summer to enable a representation to be made by ships of the Royal Navy at this year's 40th anniversary celebrations of the D-Day landings, especially bearing in mind that Her Majesty the Queen will be attending those celebrations?
§ Mr. HeseltineI am grateful to my hon. Friend for enabling me to say that we have considered that matter within the Ministry in terms of a general application to our armed services. I hope that I shall be able to respond favourably to his idea.
§ Mr. SheermanHas the Secretary of State evidence of savings in defence costs arising from transporting British troops by public transport, especially by the North sea ferries? Is he aware that the mass transportation of troops on civilian carriers is causing great distress to civilian passengers? Is he further aware that a large number of my constituents were terrorised by British Army troops on the Norland last Thursday?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That is miles wide of the question.
§ Mr. TerlezkiIs the Secretary of State aware of the total defence expenditure of the Soviet Union and other Warsaw pact countries? How does it compare with United Kingdom spending?
§ Mr. HeseltineMy hon. Friend will appreciate the difficulty of extracting precise information from the accounts of the Soviet Union, but he will be fully aware that as a proportion of its national output it spends greatly in excess of what we spend.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesAre not the costs of Trident estimated at £1 billion a year, which makes a total of £2 billion since the Secretary of State held office? Is not half of that cost totally outside his control and at the mercy either of international exchanges or American arms manufacturers? Is it not a fact that in a few years' time the Secretary of State will have to make further substantial cuts in conventional defences to pay for Trident?
§ Mr. HeseltineI do not think that we shall need to do that. We expect the dollar spend to remain in the order of 187 45 per cent., and that Trident, as a percentage of the increased defence budget, will average 3 per cent., and in peak years, perhaps 6 per cent.