HC Deb 22 May 1984 vol 60 cc815-6
7. Mr. Hal Miller

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what proposals he has for increasing the fighting capabilities and the deterrent effect of all three services.

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

I refer my hon. Friend to chapter four of the "Statement on the Defence Estimates 1984" (Cmnd. 9227) published last week.

Mr. Miller

Will my hon. Friend welcome the response by our European partners in NATO to the United States initiative on emerging technology, which offers significant opportunities not only for increasing our fighting capabilities but for industrial sales if the defence budget can be weighted in favour of equipment rather than recurrent costs?

Mr. Pattie

I agree with my hon. Friend. We welcome the opportunities presented by emerging technologies and we intend to see that British industry gets more than its share of the opportunities presented.

Mr. Duffy

Is the Minister aware that the defence estimates to which he refers received a bad press, on the whole, last week? How does he respond to the judgment in The Daily Telegraph a week ago today that, whatever economies his right hon. Friend secures, the future appears to hold only the promise of further defence reviews and the erosion of our defence capabilities? In particular, how does he respond to the conclusion of the The Daily Telegraph that his right hon. Friend has done nothing to confront that prospect?

Mr. Pattie

It will not surprise the hon. Gentleman to know that I do not agree with the conclusion of The Daily Telegraph. Nor do I agree that the White Paper had a bad press. It was well received in all quarters, apart from some rather idiosyncratic leading articles about it in certain journals.

Mr. Robert Banks

Is it not the case that our fighting capabilities more and more depend on communications and technology in space? Does my hon. Friend agree that we are witnessing a race between the Soviet Union and the United States to put weapons into space? Has not the time arrived when the two sides should come to the table to seek ways to prevent this developing?

Mr. Pattie

I am sure that what my hon. Friend says will be noted by my right hon. and learned Friend the Foreign Secretary, who is responsible for this subject. As to space development in military terms, I assure my hon. Friend and the House that, as far as our budget allows, we shall keep a close watch on these developments.

Mr. Barron

What likely effect will the Trident programme proposed by the Government have on our non-nuclear defence capability?

Mr. Pattie

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the White Paper, where that question is answered in detail.

Sir Dudley Smith

What contribution would greater harmonisation of weapons and equipment within NATO make to the efficiency of our own forces?

Mr. Pattie

It is difficult to give a precise answer to that. Some standardisation and inter-operability is desirable, but, as my hon. Friend knows from his experience, other factors — usually of a political or industrial nature—have to be coped with.

Mr. McNamara

Who was responsible for deciding that we would spend £3 million a day on the Falkland Islands, but was not prepared to spend a similar amount to save the jobs and livelihoods of an equivalent number of people in Scotland?

Mr. Pattie

I thought it would be clear that the decision to which the hon. Gentleman refers was taken by the Cabinet.