Military Music

HC Deb 22 November 1994 vol 250 cc458-9

8. Mr. David Shaw

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the total costs associated with military music training and performances in the current year.

Mr. Soames

We expect to spend approximately £8,750,000 on such training across the three services during the current financial year. The costs associated with military music performances are not recorded centrally.

Mr. Shaw

Does my hon. Friend agree that if Ministers really want to save money in military music training the long-term proposal for civilianisation can be best implemented by basing it in the south barracks at Deal, and that it will be a complete waste of time, money and effort to close Deal in 1996 if civilianisation can be achieved by that time? Does he also agree that we should not be looking at civilianisation in 2000, but that we should bring the date forward?

Mr. Soames

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who made a compelling and formidable speech last night in the Adjournment debate. I regret to have to tell him that there are clear and very compelling financial reasons why we have to remove the Royal Marines school of music from Deal, not least being the cost.

As I have said, the total cost of music training is £8.7 million per year, of which £6.7 million accrues to Deal and £2 million to Kneller hall. That is not good value for money and I am afraid that, however my hon. Friend tinkers with the figures, we will not be able to come to a more satisfactory conclusion. I look forward to meeting my hon. Friend and others of his colleagues in the near future to go through the figures.

Mr. Foulkes

Does the Minister agree that the Deal school of music would have had a greater chance of survival if the hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Shaw) had spent more time in Deal and less time in Monklands?

Mr. Soames

On the contrary, the hon. Gentleman—who is not an uncharitable man—should know that my hon. Friend has fought, quite rightly, with great vigour and determination for the interests of his constituents, as indeed the hon. Gentleman would have done. His is an outrageous suggestion.