§ Mr. Sheldonasked the Secretary of Defence what would be the total annual saving for each base east of Suez if it were closed down and all personnel, military and otherwise, demobilised, such saving to include that part of the cost of support bases attributable to maintaining the base closed down, and the savings on that part of the support forces attributable to maintaining the base, on ships, weapons and stores required for the base or that proportion attributable to it, on ships, weapons and stores held in reserve or the proportion attributable, on transport of men and supplies to the base, on keeping a reserve of transport for such work or the proportion attributable, on demobilising personnel used to provide transport and reserve transport facilities or such proportion attributable, and the saving due to marginal cost of recruitment of men for the base and for support forces on a reduction in overheads including staff in the United Kingdom and support bases concerned with planning, organising, weapons procurement and other functions or that proportion attributable to the base, all the above savings to include all personnel, military and otherwise, and neglecting all compensation payments.
§ Mr. HealeyAn examination of possible savings arising from reduced commitments is, of course, one essential feature of the current defence review. Because of the multi-purpose roles of a large proportion of the forces now serving east of Suez, however, their directly attributable cost—about £320 million a year—is not a meaningful figure in this context.
106WAs I explained in my reply to the hon. Member's earlier Question on 6th April, to purport to make an accurate assessment of costs indirectly attributable to our east of Suez commitments could be very misleading.