DEFENCE EXPENDITURE (Hansard, 19 July 1979)

§ Lord SHINWELL
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The MINISTER of STATE, MINISTRY of DEFENCE (Lord Strathcona and Mount Royal)
My Lords, Her 1504 Majesty's Government have already increased the Defence Cash Limit for the current year by more than £400 million. For the future, we have had no hesitation in endorsing the NATO aim of continued annual growth in national defence expenditure in the region of 3 per cent. per annum in real terms until 1986. We shall be taking this commitment fully into consideration when deciding future defence budget levels. Studies are in hand to assess how our forces can be strengthened most effectively.

§ Lord SHINWELL
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord this: is not the bulk of the £400 million a sum decided by the previous Government? In fact, is not the increase proposed by the present Government just £100 million? Is that in accordance with all the criticisms directed against the previous Government for not having provided sufficient expenditure for defence? In fact, is not the money intended for the purpose of increasing the pay of officers and other ranks in the forces and not for the purpose of equipment? Is the noble Lord aware of the shortage of equipment in the Navy, and the shortage of aircraftmen in the Air Force resulting from the fact that we cannot afford to pay the amounts required? Has the time not arrived when the present Government, having indulged in harsh criticism of the previous Government, should have the decency to apologise?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
The noble Lord asked a fair number of questions in that one supplementary, my Lords, and I shall do my best to reply. Taking the question of Service pay—which I think gives the lie to the general trend of his question—the increase required for the increases in Service pay (which I think he will agree were not part of the last Government's policy) is £269½ million. On top of that there is £100 million extra for equipment. I am only too painfully aware of certain inadequacies of equipment. However, I must point out to the noble Lord that we have a more serious shortfall in manpower today than we have in equipment.

Lord INGLEWOOD
My Lords, can the Minister say whether any part of the increase about which he has spoken is likely to be directed towards civil defence, 1505 which the late Government neglected so badly? Will he bear in mind that those who work in the sphere of civil defence are largely volunteers and therefore do not require pay or pay increases, so that any increase in that sphere is likely to go on equipment and, therefore, be very good value for money?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
My Lords, so far as the Ministry of Defence is concerned, there would be no money for civil defence; if there were, I think it would come under another department.

§ Lord WIGG
My Lords, is the Minister aware that what he has said today is a wholesale condemnation of the policies of Conservative Governments since 1957, when they abandoned conscription, so that at the end of the day they can neither provide the equipment nor provide sufficient pay to produce balanced forces? The result is that we have spent £91,000 million on defence since the war and, in real terms, we could not knock the skin off a rice pudding.

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
I have argued before with the noble Lord about the effectiveness of our forces, my Lords, but I am answering questions for this Government, not for three or four Governments ago.

§ Lord SHINWELL
My Lords, the Minister is answering questions not only for the present Government but for the nation as a whole. Would he say how much of the money is to be devoted to the purpose of providing increased bounties for additional recruitment for the TVAR, which is of the utmost importance because of the shortage of Regular manpower in the Services?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
My Lords, I am hoping there will be an announcement concerning the Territorial Army quite shortly.

§ The Earl of KIMBERLEY
My Lords, would my noble friend agree that we are way down the list of countries that export defence equipment and that, if we could export more defence equipment, not only should we achieve increased employment but we should have more money to spend on our own security?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
I would not disagree with that at all, my Lords.

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether, simultaneously, Her Majesty's Government are co-operating with the restructured Committee on Disarmament at Geneva set up by the United Nations Special Assembly for multinational disarmament?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
My Lords, I am endeavouring to answer a Question about spending more money on defence. I hardly think the noble Lord's question has anything to do with that. In so far as it would apply, it would be directly to the contrary.

§ Lord LUCAS of CHILWORTH
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government in regard to increased pay for the armed forces that, as a contra, local overseas allowances should be cut, so, in practice, nullifying the effect of any increases and therefore exerting a detrimental effect on recruitment to the forces?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
That is a rather complicated question, my Lords. It is true that local overseas allowances have been re-examined and restructured; some have gone up and some have come down.

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, would the Minister on second thoughts not agree that the question of my noble friend Lord Brockway relating to the Committee on Disarmament in Geneva has everything to do with defence and security to the extent that, in so far as we can get agreed mutually verifiable reductions in ground forces in central Europe, real security will follow disarmament, and true security is the best form of defence we can get?

§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYAL
My Lords, I would not disagree with the general sentiment that we have no wish to indulge in an arms race, but I am addressing myself to the question whether this Government are going to spend more money on defence and, if so, how, and I would suggest that the question of the broad spectrum of disarmament is not relevant to that question at all.