HC Deb 20 July 1993 vol 229 cc187-8
10. Mr. Roy Hughes

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent discussions he has had with his United States counterpart concerning future defence procurement.

Mr. Aitken

My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State met United States Defence Secretary Mr. Les Aspin in April and May. They had wide-ranging discussions on defence matters.

Mr. Hughes

I draw the Minister's attention to the clear message coming from the United States that Governments should do more to assist the defence industry to diversify. Many defence establishments are being closed or run down and people are being put out of work. Market forces alone will not provide the new jobs. There is a need for active Government intervention. Does he accept that simple message coming from across the other side of the Atlantic?

Mr. Aitken

I certainly do not accept the message coming from the other side of the House on that matter. The hon. Gentleman praises the American announcements, but if he looked more closely at them he would see that they have been greeted by a great deal of quite knowledgeable criticism. In particular, I draw his attention to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal headed "The False Promise of Defence Conversion". It contained a great line from a senior defence official saying that the programme so far had been "unblemished by success." We should like to see a much more credible programme before a penny of taxpayers' money is put into it.

Sir Geoffrey Johnson Smith

My hon. Friend has taken a number of important initiatives to let British industry know about the future defence needs of the country and the part that it can play. I congratulate him on that. Is he aware that, during the past few years, defence procurement as a proportion of our arms budget has fallen, and that if we are to have a smaller but meaner, tougher and better equipped Army, it is necessary for that trend to be reversed?

Mr. Aitken

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's point. I should make it clear that the defence equipment budget remains, by any standards, a substantial one. In the current year, we expect to spend just over £9 billion, or 39 per cent. of the defence budget, on it. In view of the new strategic and security situation, that is a realistic proportion.

Mr. Menzies Campbell

In the matter of defence procurement, is not the best way ahead to be found in the memorandum of understanding signed last week by the United Kingdom, France and Italy for the development and production of an anti-air warfare frigate to replace the type 42? Are not such procurement decisions important steps towards the common defence policy that the Maastricht treaty envisages?

Mr. Aitken

We believe that that project is the right one. That is why we signed the memorandum of understanding. However, it is a most acrobatic leap, which only a dedicated Liberal federalist could make, from a simple procurement project to a common European defence policy. That is going a long and dramatic way, and I cannot go down the same road.