§ 2.50 p.m.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what number and what types of aircraft are available to the Royal Navy for fishery protection purposes.
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, at present a Royal Navy Sea Devon aircraft is regularly employed on fishery protection. Other fixed and rotary wing aircraft are employed from time to time as required. From 1st January 1977, a month today, the main air support for fishery protection will be provided by the Royal Air Force who will be allocating four Nimrod long range surveillance aircraft to work in conjunction with the fishery protection ships of the Royal Navy and the fishery protection fleet operated by the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I am greatly obliged to the noble Lord for that Answer. Is he satisfied that the present fleet of only one small Sea Devon aircraft is really adequate for the task, since it is, as he says, the only aircraft permanently allocated at present for that purpose? Having regard to the fact that the limit is shortly to be extended to 200 miles, is he further satisfied that the four Nimrod aircraft, which he says are to be added to 277 the fleet in the New Year, will bring the total fleet up to strength?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, one month from now we shall have our four Nimrods on station, and a Nimrod can cover between 500 and 5,000 square miles per hour according to the density of the fishing activity. The rough average is expected to be about 2,000 square miles per hour and that, I should have thought, was a fairly adequate area of coverage.
§ The Earl of KIMBERLEYMy Lords, in view of the increased limit of 200 miles, can the Minister say whether progress has been made on any suggestion to the other countries in the EEC that some form of joint air surveillance might be arranged in the near future?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, I hope the noble Earl will not think me discourteous if I say that this will be an important point in the speech I may make at some late hour tonight, and perhaps he will wait with controlled patience until then.
§ Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYEMy Lords, in view of the fact that the capital cost is infinitesimal compared with that of a modern service aircraft; that the maintenance and running costs are infinitesimal compared with the running costs per hour of modern aircraft; that the semi-rigid dirigibles did invaluable North Sea patrol work with great success in World War I, and there is no reason why they should not do similar work now at a much lower cost, have the Government made a close study of the possibility of using semi-rigid dirigibles for this sea patrol work?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, this is a most interesting point, but perhaps an Unstarred Question at a later date might produce more information.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that it gives me great delight to hear noble Members of this House approaching a problem that I mentioned the other day when I suggested that it would be much cheaper if we developed the airship rather than those methods of transport they scoffed about the other day?
§ Lord MOTTISTONEMy Lords, when the noble Lord refers to four Nimrods as being the allocation, does he mean a total of four, or four on task throughout the 24 hours?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, it will be a unit of four constantly on duty.
§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYALMy Lords, can the noble Lord tell the House whether the Government have any plans to order any ships smaller than frigates which are capable of carrying helicopters for this purpose?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMMy Lords, that again is something we might discuss later this evening, but, as the noble Lord knows, there is the Islander class coming forward.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, will the noble Lord tell the House where the Nimrod aircraft are to be based?
§ Lord WINTERBOTTOMNo, not now, my Lords; it will presumably be with the rest of the squadron.