§ 5. Mr. FatchettTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to decide on a replacement for the Challenger tank; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. YoungerThe Challenger tank entered service in 1984, and deliveries to equip a total of seven regiments will not be completed until the end of the decade. We have no plans at present to replace Challenger.
§ Mr. FatchettWe seem to go through this process of questioning every month. At the Vickers factory in Leeds there appears to be an unfortunate hiatus in orders for the new Challenger tanks and in their development. If an order is not placed before long, 700 jobs will be lost at the factory. Is the Secretary of State at all concerned about the potential loss of jobs in Leeds, or is he happy to allow the order to go to its German and American counterparts?
§ Mr. YoungerThere is no question of that at present. As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are considering whether we can replace the Chieftain tank and, if so, with what tank we should replace it. We hope that there will be competition and that the Leeds factory will feel able to put in a competitive bid for whatever orders are put out to tender. We hope to decide what to do before the end of the year.
§ Mr. WilkinsonCan my right hon. Friend assure the House that in making that important decision, which is overdue for the Army, he will take into consideration the potential of dedicated battlefield anti-tank helicopters against armour?
§ Mr. YoungerI thank my hon. Friend for his suggestion. We are looking widely at the whole range of methods by which we can deal with the threat from enemy armour. One is the provision of effective tanks, but there are other alternatives, and I shall not rule out what he has said.
§ Mr. DuffyThe Secretary of State's reply, that he has no successor programmes in hand, is very alarming. He must know that the last significant British development in tank technology was announced by a Labour Government, in respect of Chobham armour. There has been nothing of significance since, although, as the right hon. Gentleman will know, the Soviets have made significant developments over the past two years. As his hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson) has just reminded him, that also applies to anti-tank weaponry.
§ Mr. YoungerThat is perfectly true, and that is why we are examining the choices that we can make for the replacement of Chieftain and whether we can afford it.
§ Mr. WigginDoes my right hon. Friend accept, when taking advice on the matter, that the great weight of anti-tank weaponry possessed by all sides in a future battle is likely to make the tank about as effective as the horse was at the beginning of the last war? Will he be very careful before he proceeds to spend large sums on future tank technology?
§ Mr. YoungerI appreciate that there are various ways of dealing with the threat from tanks, but I do not think that I would subscribe to my hon. Friend's description of the tank as being quite so ineffective.
§ Mr. WallaceIs not the delay in placing orders for Challenger tanks and coming forward with a replacement programme for Chieftain a symptom of the problems that the Secretary of State faces in trying to get his defence budget to match? He is postponing important decisions. Now that such a distinguished Conservative Back Bencher as the right hon. and learned Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Brittan) has advocated a defence review, does he not think that it is time to take that advice?
§ Mr. YoungerI do not agree. As there was no question in the past of further tank orders, we are now considering what to do about replacing the Chieftain tank. We review the defence programme every year and balance resources with the programme. This year is no exception.
§ Mr. PatnickIf and when my right hon. Friend considers a replacement for the Chieftain tank, will he bear in mind that the tracks and turret are made in a subsidiary 244 of a Sheffield firm, William Cook plc? Will he take that fact into account in ensuring that the best possible equipment is obtained for the British Army?
§ Mr. YoungerI thank my hon. Friend for drawing my attention to that fact. It would be for the makers to decide whether subcontractors should be employed to do the work. I have no doubt that in due course that my hon. Friend will be drawing that fact to the attention of the makers of the tank.