HC Deb 26 June 1984 vol 62 cc795-6
5. Mr. Favell

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy regarding the sale of defence equipment to Norway.

The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Mr. Geoffrey Pattie)

The wide range of defence equipment manufactured in this country is generally available for sale to Norway, as to our other NATO Allies.

Mr. Favell

May I remind my hon. Friend that Britain is about to enter into its largest single contract—for the purchase of £20 million-worth of gas from Norway's Sleipner field? What steps are being taken to alert the manufacturers of British defence equipment, and what steps are being taken to assist them?

Mr. Pattie

The manufacturers of British defence equipment are already fully aware of the opportunities for them in the sale to Norway. When the Secretary of State met his opposite number in Norway in February, he had conversations about the possibility of a memorandum of understanding being signed. My right hon. Friend said then that if suitable opportunities for collaboration could be defined it would be worth proceeding. So far no such opportunity has been ascertained.

Mr. McNamara

The question of general defence sales to Norway, to other NATO Allies and elsewhere is fraught with political difficulty and enormous secrecy. Why is the Ministry not at least prepared to tell the House the value of the sales to particular nations, the extent to which they involve high technology and the two-way street involved in the sales? Without that information we do not know the effect of our sales elsewhere or the effect of our purchases. When one considers the ratio of United States purchases to United Kingdom purchases—whatever happened under the last Labour Government—are we not in enormous deficit against the United States, the most closed market for defence equipment in the world?

Mr. Pattie

It is not true to say that we are in an enormous deficit with the United States. When the Conservative Government came to office in May 1979, the imbalance against us was 4:1. Today it is about 2:1 compared with the ratio for other European nations of about 9:1. One of the main reasons for a degree of confidentiality about such transactions is the will of the purchaser. Purchasers wish such details not to be widely publicised.

Back to
Forward to