§ 2. Mr. Nick St. Aubyn (Guildford)What representations he has received on his Department's procurement policy in respect of United Kingdom-built aircraft; and if he will make a statement. [86531]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. John Spellar)The MOD receives representations on its procurement policy for aircraft and their components built in the UK from time to time.
§ Mr. St. AubynThe Minister will be aware, from forceful representations made by both my right hon. Friend the Member for South-West Surrey (Mrs. Bottomley) and me, of the growing concern about British Aerospace's facility at Dunsfold, which is a centre of excellence for return-to-work contracts for the RAF Harrier. Is he 746 aware that, although half of that work is for foreign defence forces, the other half is for the RAF, and that a cloud hangs over the future of that work, which is the prime work carried out at Dunsfold? Is the Minister further aware that the competition for that work coming from the Defence Aviation Repair Agency is not, in the view of those at Dunsfold, fair competition as the DARA is based at an RAF airfield and the costs are not appropriate? Will he ensure that the great expertise and technical skills that the workers at Dunsfold have built up over the years will still be available to ensure that Harriers of the future are as safe and effective as those in the past?
§ Mr. SpellarI share the hon. Gentleman's appreciation of the work undertaken by those at Dunsfold. I have had representations not only from hon. Members, but from the shop stewards committee there, which came to see me earlier this year. It has invited me to visit the site, which I hope to do some time this year. The hon. Gentleman will understand that I have been slightly distracted with other business over the past few months. I reject the hon. Gentleman's insinuation that the competition for the repair work was not conducted fairly. I am slightly surprised to hear a prominent right-wing Conservative so unenamoured of competition. Following the representations, we looked to ensure that there had been proper and effective competition, that work was being won fairly and that there is a role for both Dunsfold and for the Defence Aviation Repair Agency, which does excellent work not just at St. Athan, but at Sealand, Fleetlands and Perth. Those are excellent establishments, which all do good work. They are an important part of Britain's aerospace capability. We appreciate them and do not think that setting up competition between them by criticising one then the other is the right way to proceed.
§ Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley)Will the Minister accept the congratulations of both sides of the House on the fact that the Government have sought to buy British-built aircraft? Will he confirm support for a European strategic heavy lift aircraft, known as the FLA?
§ Mr. SpellarAs my hon. Friend knows, along with our European partner nations, we are evaluating the successor aircraft for heavy lift. A strong contender is the A400M, as the future large aircraft is now known. There are other competitors, and British Aerospace is playing a key part in the Airbus military company. We hope to announce the result of that competition early next year.
§ Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)Is not that an inordinately long time to have to wait for the decision on a vital strategic heavy lift requirement for the Royal Air Force, which was identified by Her Majesty's Government last July in its own strategic defence review? Is not it clear that for years the Royal Air Force has needed such a capability of its own? There are perfectly good aeroplanes, such as the C17 or the equivalent Antonov 120, which could have been evaluated long since had the Government had the will or given the matter the priority it deserved.
§ Mr. SpellarI welcome that criticism of the previous Government's record of delays. There is slight confusion. The hon. Gentleman is slipping between the short-term strategic lift requirement and the future transport aircraft. 747 There are two separate but not unrelated competitions, and we hope to make an announcement on both of them early next year. That is by no means an inordinate time scale to undertake proper technical evaluation, especially with a number of partner nations.