Gibraltar Dockyard Closure (Hansard, 5 July 1983)

§ Lord Boothby
My Lords, in rising to beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, I should like to apologise to your Lordships for 504 being too late to ask my Question yesterday, owing to the fact that my clock stopped.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces (Lord Trefgarne)
No. my Lords. We have already announced our decision to close the Royal Naval Dockyard in Gibraltar. Equally we have made clear our hope that a commercial undertaking will take over the facilities and offer employment to many of those currently working in the dockyard. Sir Joshua Hassan visited London last week to discuss the implementation of this decision. My honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement is today visiting Gibraltar to continue these discussions and to outline the generous support that Her Majesty's Government are prepared to make available to bring about these changes.

§ Lord Boothby
My Lords. I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. Is he aware that repeated assurances have been given that we would not admit Spain to the Common Market so long as she keeps up the blockade of Gibraltar, which she is now doing? Indeed, that is doing great harm to the citizens of Gibraltar. I ask the noble Lord and the Government to bear in mind that the dockyard at Gibraltar was absolutely essential to us in two world wars, from start to finish, and that without it we could not possibly have dispatched the expeditionary force to the Falklands in time. Why choose this moment to harm the Gibraltarians, now happily British subjects, and still further to weaken British naval power?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, so far as Spanish entry into the European Community is concerned in relation to the restrictions to which the noble Lord has referred, it is of course the case that Spain agreed to lift these restrictions by virtue of the Lisbon Agreement, which was agreed to in 1980 and she confirmed that in 1982. As many have said before at this Dispatch Box, including me, it would be inconceivable that Spain could enter the European Community while these restrictions remained in force.
As for dockyard capacity in relation to the Falklands expedition and other matters, I can say that we have very carefully considered the need for dockyard capacity as a whole, and the capacity that we are now planning will fully meet our requirements. We have taken that decision in the light of the Falklands experience.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, notwithstanding what the noble Lord has said, is it not the case that closure will be a damaging blow to the Gibraltar economy? Can the noble Lord confirm whether 1,400 men will lose their work as a result of the closure and that about 500 people will be indirectly affected, making a total of 2,000? Can he confirm whether that is true or not? Secondly, as regards the proposal of Her Majesty's Government to help the Gibraltar Government, would he say precisely what they have in mind? Will jobs to match those losses of about 2,000 be 505 found by the Government and, if so, in what way? Can he say what importance NATO attach to Gibraltar in the Western Mediterranean? Have our NATO allies made any comments about our proposals to close this dockyard? If so, what have they said? Can the Gibraltar dockyard under civilian ownership deal, for example, with nuclear submarines?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, there are a number of questions included in that supplementary which I shall seek to answer. The package that we are suggesting to the Gibraltar Government in respect of this matter is a very comprehensive and generous one. We are proposing to transfer the yard and its assets free of charge to the Gibraltar Government. We are proposing to provide £28 million-worth of aid to meet an initial refit of the yard and certain initial operating costs. We are proposing in addition to provide a substantial package of Royal Naval work to the new dockyard under its commercial managers. In addition to that, we announced last year an aid package amounting to some £13 million to the Gibraltar Government and that is now being specifically committed to projects over a period of years. Finally, there are the generous redundancy payments which will be made available to the dockyard workers. What is proposed in that regard is that there are about 1,100 workers in the dockyard at present of whom 900 will initially be made redundant; 200 will be transferred to the Royal Navy base which will, of course, continue; I think that about 300 will be taken on by the new commercial operators of the yard initially, and another considerable number of dockyard workers will be taken on as the commercial work in the yard develops and proceeds.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, will the noble Lord answer the point I asked him about NATO? Is it not the fact that the only commitment he has now given to the House is that 900 of these workers will be made redundant and there is no absolute assurance that they will be re-employed?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, on the NATO point it is the fact that the NATO states make provision for their own refit and repair of their vessels and the yard, therefore, had no specific NATO role. I suggest that it is important to distinguish between the dockyard and the naval base. The naval base in Gibraltar does, of course, have a continuing naval role. As for the redundancy point to which the noble Lord referred, it is the case that 900 will initially be made redundant, but 300 or so will be taken on almost at once by the commercialisation of the yard.

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
My Lords, does my noble Fiend accept that the abandonment at this moment of the historic naval dockyward at Gibraltar is likely to stimulate Spanish ambitions in that direction; and, secondly, will he tell the House what will happen if no commercial operator is prepared to take it on?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I believe that there is a commercial operator willing to take on the yard. As the noble Lord may be aware, the firm of Appledore—whose name may be familiar to the noble Lord—have indicted that they are willing to do that.

§ Lord Shinwell
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that he has not answered the question which, above all others, is of supreme importance—namely, in the context of defence in the Mediterranean, what is the alternative to a naval dockyard, the purpose of which is to prepare and maintain vessels under the control of the British Government? Or is this matter being considered not in the context of future defence, but in order to satisfy the Spanish Government?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, it certainly has nothing to do with the views of the Spanish Government. I suggest that the provision of dockyard facilities is separate from the provision of defence facilities. The defence facilities at Gibraltar—namely, the provision of the naval base, the aerodrome, the infantry battalion and the arming of the local Gibraltar regiment on the Rock, are really separate from the provision of dockyard facilities. As naval technology has developed, the requirement for dockyard facilities has changed very substantially. As your Lordships know, the Chatham Dockyard is to be closed shortly—indeed, it is already virtually closed—and for that reason it was not thought proper that the additional facility at Gibraltar should be kept open.

§ Lord Merrivale
My Lords, can my noble friend tell us what is the present state of discussions between officials of Her Majesty's Government, the Gibraltar Government, A. & P. Appledore International Limited and other interested parties? Can he say whether in effect the question of viability has been confirmed? If not, will Her Majesty's Government be prepared to look closer at the idea of an extended interim period, should it be viable, before commercialisation completely takes effect?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I hope that my noble friend will forgive me if I do not develop the position of the discussions presently in train between Her Majesty's Government and the Gibraltar Government because my honourable friend is in fact in Gibraltar today, and I would not wish to say anything that made his task more difficult. As for the position of Appledore, that company will of course be dealing with the Gibraltar Government and not the British Government. But our contribution to the success of the yard, among all the measures within the package to which I have referred, is of course the Royal Naval work, which is very substantial, and of course the considerable sum of money.

§ Lord Bishopston
My Lords, will the noble Lord the Minister answer the question asked by his noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter in which he referred to our relationship with Spain? Will the apparent pulling out of Gibraltar raise the hopes of the Spanish Government? Have the Government really learned nothing from the lessons of the Falklands?

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, we are not pulling out of Gibraltar; we maintain a very significant defence posture in Gibraltar, which of course relates to the threat to NATO.

§ Lord Boothby
My Lords, I do not want to make a debate out of this, but I ask the noble Lord to consider 507 just one point. If the Government have their way over this matter, there will be no permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean since the Tudors reigned over this country.

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I am afraid that the noble Lord is mistaken. Although there will be no naval dockyard as such in Gibraltar, the naval base there will continue, including all the forces to which I have referred.

§ The Lord President of the Council (Viscount Whitelaw)
My Lords, I think that the House would now wish to move on.