§ 5. Tony Baldry (Banbury)What financial targets have been agreed with the Treasury for returns on the disposal of MOD land surplus to requirements. [50944]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Dr. Lewis Moonie)As part of the comprehensive spending review in 1998, the Ministry of Defence was set a target of £700 million in estate disposal receipts over the four years to March 2002. The MOD achieved cash receipts of £819 million against that target.
The spending review 2000 set another demanding target of £600 million of asset disposals, including equipment and other non-land disposals in the three years between 2001 and 2004. We expect that receipts from the sale of surplus land will make up the bulk of that target. An accrued receipt of £208 million in the financial year just ended represents an excellent start.
§ Tony BaldryIn the interests of openness, will the Minister explain whether, if MOD land at Bicester is made available for an accommodation centre, the Home Office will have to pay a commercial rate for the land? If not, will the MOD budget bear the loss?
§ Dr. MoonieI shall certainly write to the hon. Gentleman on this matter if I am wrong, but, as far as I am aware, this is based on normal valuation of the land concerned. If that is not the case, I shall send the hon. Gentleman the correct reply to his question.
§ Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot)Surely the truth is that the MOD is hooked on asset stripping to underwrite its day-to-day expenditure requirements. Is it not the case that while the Minister waits for land and other assets to be sold off—including, I must remind him, 27 per cent. of the Aldershot garrison—HMS Monmouth lies idle awaiting a refit, 5 Squadron's Tornadoes have been mothballed, infantry recruitment has been put on hold until September, and Para recruits cannot complete P Company owing to a shortage of C130 crews and aircraft? When will the Government match the resources to the commitments that they are imposing on our hard-worked armed forces?
§ Dr. MoonieI think that one of the points of selling land that is surplus to requirements is to get what receipts we can to offset the costs of the very matters that the Opposition spokesman is talking about. Surely, one can hardly suggest that the MOD ought to hold on to land that is surplus to requirements. That would be commercially and militarily foolish, to say the least.
§ Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)Will the Minister bear in mind that, in this age of international terrorism, it is more important than ever for the Royal Air Force to have options to disperse its aircraft? If it is going to concentrate its aircraft in an ever smaller number of bases, they will be inherently more vulnerable. Will the hon. Gentleman assure the House that no more flying stations will be closed in the next few years?
§ Dr. MoonieNo, I certainly cannot assure the House on that matter. I have to say, however, that any disposals 657 or closures are made on the advice of the service chiefs in the department; they are not just plucked out of thin air by Ministers sitting in Whitehall.