§ 13. Mr. Thurnhamasked the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to be in a position to put forward specific proposals for moving defence establishments to the north of England; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. LeeThis is a matter for continuing review as opportunities arise, such as when major investment is required, but as I said in answer to my hon. Friend on 11 February at column 440 of the Official Report, all proposals will need to stand on their economic and operational merits.
§ Mr. ThurnhamWill my hon. Friend comment on the imbalance between the north and south of Britain in the number of jobs for service men and civilians, and will he ask our right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer for funds to correct that topsy-turvy imbalance?
§ Mr. LeeIt is for my hon. Friend to approach the Treasury for extra funds. Seventy per cent. of service personnel and 64 per cent. of civilians whom we employ are based in the south-east and south-west regions combined.
§ Mr. BeithAs there is little prospect of a defence establishment moving to the north-east of England in the next year or so, will the Minister at least think in terms of our high unemployment level when he considers contracts such as that for an auxiliary oiler replacement vessel, which could well be placed at the Swan Hunter yard on Tyneside?
§ Mr. LeeThe hon. Gentleman is being clever in moving to a completely different topic. Tenders for the AOR vessels are being evaluated. Tenders are in from Swan Hunter and Harland and Wolff.
§ Mr. HoltWill my hon. Friend also take into consideration the fact that ex-service men who have served 801 their country and enjoy a pension are banned from jobs by Cleveland county council and so their employment prospects are even further reduced? Will he bear that in mind when seeking somewhere to establish a place where ex-service men can work?
§ Mr. LeeI am appalled to hear what my hon. Friend says. The behaviour of Cleveland county council sounds appalling.