HL Deb 18 April 1986 vol 473 cc880-1

11.22 a.m.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the largest sum guaranteed to exporters by them in respect of arms exports to a country whose identity they will not reveal to Parliament (H.L. Debates, 15th April 1986, col. 658) before the £100 million reported in Cmnd. 9753.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, the contingent liability in question is not a guarantee of a sum of money to an exporter but an assessment of the potential exposure to Her Majesty's Government of completing the supply. The largest previous risk of this nature was the £16 million referred to in Cmnd. 9746.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, is this not a very large increase from £16 million to £100 million? What is the need for secrecy? Why is it necessary to ask Parliament to approve the gift of £100 million in certain circumstances in order to ensure the sale of arms to a country which the Government are not ready to name? Even if the country itself is not ready to be named, do we wish this country to be the kind of country where you can expect taxpayers' help in secret arms purchases?

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, in matters of defence exports, it has been the practice of succeeding governments not to give details of specific sales. It is for the customer to do that if he wishes, and that has always been the way of it. It is right and it is necessary that the House should beware of contingent liability of this magnitude, but I can assure the noble Lord that this contingent liability, in common with all other departmental financial dealings, is subject to the scrutiny of the Comptroller and Auditor-General and of the Public Accounts Committee.

Forward to