HL Deb 16 April 1991 vol 527 cc1342-4

3.2 p.m.

Lord Dean of Beswick asked Her Majesty's Government:

When they expect to announce the successor to the present generation of tanks used in the British Army.

Lord Reay

My Lords, I hope that a decision on the equipment for the future main battle tank fleet will not be delayed too long.

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, that is the answer that has been given for some time. Did the Minister see the report in The Times business supplement at the weekend which indicated that the final bids for the successor tank were to be in by Thursday last? Therefore should the answer not be forthcoming quickly? In its evaluation of the tank, will the Government place high among their priorities continuity of supply from our own people, bearing in mind the disappointment that was felt with the Belgian reaction when we tried to buy ammunition to supply our troops in the Gulf war? Is it not safer to have our own supplier rather than a foreign supplier when governments and policies can change overnight?

Lord Reay

My Lords, I saw the press report to which the noble Lord referred, but it is premature to suggest that any decision has yet been taken. No decision has yet been taken.

Lord Mayhew

My Lords, is it a fact that the Government gave a grant to Vickers in 1988 to develop a new version of the Challenger on the understanding that a decision as to whether orders would be placed would be taken in September last? If Vickers continues to maintain its large and expensive development group, is there not a reasonable case for giving the company another modest grant until the decision is made?

Lord Reay

My Lords, I cannot accept that there has been any undue delay. We must take the time necessary to analyse thoroughly the lessons that are to be learnt from the Gulf conflict.

Lord Glenarthur

My Lords, while accepting that the British tank industry must compete in terms of both performance and cost, perhaps I may ask this question. Does my noble friend agree that the history of tank building in this country has been second to none? Does he also agree that in terms of performance what we have seen recently in the Gulf war has demonstrated clearly that when properly maintained and resupplied, British tanks can out-perform many others?

Lord Reay

My Lords, I agree with my noble friend. The Challenger I tank clearly performed very well in the Gulf. The support operations provided by the manufacturer to the benefit of our forces in the Gulf were very impressive.

Lord Dormand of Easington

My Lords, in considering this matter, is there not the strongest possible case for the Vickers Challenger II for at least two reasons in addition to what has already been said? First, Challenger II proved itself without qualification in the Gulf war. Secondly, the expertise, the continuity and the dedication of the Tyneside workforce will guarantee the continued superb performance of Challenger II.

Lord Reay

My Lords, I think that the noble Lord meant to say that it was Challenger I which performed well in the Gulf. I agree with that.

Lord Gisborough

My Lords, to what extent has the concept of the tank become out-dated by the anti-tank weaponry which was demonstrated so well in the Gulf war?

Lord Reay

My Lords, my noble friend has raised an interesting matter which goes rather wide of the Question before us.

Lord Richard

My Lords, can the Minister help us just a little more? Does he not agree that it is high time that a decision was made on this battle tank? Can he tell us how long "not too long" is likely to be? Thirdly, does he not agree that there is, or ought to be, a presumption that in a sphere of equipment for the British Army as fundamental as the new battle tank, a British contender should be chosen unless there are very strong reasons to the contrary?

Lord Reay

My Lords, I cannot agree about the delay. This is a decision of very considerable magnitude and we do not believe that we should rush into it. We believe that a sound decision can only be taken after we have had time to assess the lessons which are to be learnt from the Gulf conflict.

Lord Elton

My Lords, does my noble friend accept that many agree with him that time must be taken to absorb recent lessons carefully? Does he also agree that, not least, it is very unwise for those who specify the armaments required to assume that they know in what climate or terrain those armaments will next be required to operate?

Lord Reay

My Lords, my noble friend has made a most pertinent point.

Lord Richard

My Lords, I am sorry to ask the Minister a second question, but he did not answer the second point that I put to him. Does he agree that there is, or ought to be, a presumption that in a matter as fundamental as a new battle tank for the British Army, unless there are very strong reasons to the contrary, it should be British?

Lord Reay

My Lords, as I said, these are matters which are under consideration but no decision has yet been taken.

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, is the Minister not aware that if the order for the tank is not given to the British company and the British workforce, tank production in this country may cease for all time? Is that not an appalling risk to take for 'the future?

Lord Reay

My Lords, all considerations, including that one, will be taken into account.