RAF Basic Trainer (Hansard, 19 December 1984)

§ Mr. David Ashby (Leicestershire, North-West)
I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the ministerial decision not to select the Hunting Firecracker as a basic trainer. In an answer yesterday to a written question about the replacement of the RAF basic trainer, the Minister for Defence Procurement rejects the all-British Hunting Firecracker and short-lists a Brazilian and a Swiss aircraft as the contenders for the contract. That decision has astounded many hon. Members and many in the country who cannot understand why a British-designed and British-built aircraft, the Firecracker, which fully meets all the design specifications of the RAF, should be rejected in favour of foreign contenders built by countries that are not even members of NATO.
There has been a mine of misinformation about the contenders. In the written answer, the Minister said that the foreign aircraft had advantages in cost and performance. Clearly, he has not properly evaluated the costs. The Brazilian aircraft is heavily subsidised by that Government, which in turn has been propped up by the western Governments. We would therefore pay twice over for that aircraft. Each of the Swiss planes—the Pilatus —will cost up to £300,000 more because, unfairly, it has been built greatly to exceed the RAF specifications. In other words, one pays one's money and takes one's choice. If the RAF were going to change the rules in midair, the other contenders should have been told. One does not learn to drive in a racing car, which is what the Swiss Pilatus is: one learns in a British Maestro.
The Hunting Firecracker is British-designed and British-built. It is entirely financed by British entrepreneurial enterprise—by people who are prepared to risk their own money.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that he is applying for leave to move the Adjournment of the House. He should not be making detailed arguments.

§ Mr. Ashby
I take your point, Mr. Speaker. This is an application under Standing order No. 10. I shall attempt not to put the argument but to present the facts.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The relevant words are "urgent", "specific" and "important".

§ Mr. Ashby
The aircraft was to be built in an area of mining decline where pits are closing, which faces 20 to 298 30 per cent. unemployment and where jobs are really needed. The enthusiasm and the great hopes of the people involved in the company and the area have been dashed. The contract is to go to a foreign aircraft manufactured under licence either by the great nationalised giant of Shorts or the great denationalised giant of British Aerospace. Whichever one it is, the British taxpayer pays for it.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman again, but he must not go into the detailed arguments that he might advance if the House gave him permission to move the Adjournment of the House to discuss the matter. He must make out his case for its urgent consideration.

§ Mr. Ashby
This is of course an urgent matter because of the answer that has been given and because of the decisions that must be taken. In terms of cost, the Hunting Firecracker — [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] — this matter relates directly to the written answer. Hunting Firecracker offered to come back with reduced costs but was told that that was not necessary. The Swiss and Brazilians are unfairly being given the opportunity to re-tender. In terms of performance, it was acknowledged by the RAF that the Hunting Firecracker—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I must stop the hon. Gentleman. He must not go into the details of the matter. He is well outside the rules. Will he now come to a conclusion?

§ Mr. Ashby
In terms of cost and in terms of performance, Hunting Firecracker is being treated unfairly. That is why it is essential that we debate the issue. There has been a debate in another place and it is right that the matter be debated here as well. That is essential to the future of the British aircraft industry.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman asks lease to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that he believes should have urgent consideration, namely, the ministerial decision not to select the Hunting Firecracker as a basic trainer. I have listened with great care to what the hon. Gentleman has said—

§ Mr. Gerald Howarth (Cannock and Burntwood)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I regret that I do not consider that the matter which the hon. Gentleman has raised is appropriate for discussion under Standing Order No. 10, and I cannot therefore submit his application to the House.