Skip to main content

Army Manpower

Volume 891: debated on Thursday 1 May 1975

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what will be the source of the extra saving of 3,000 men resulting from the restructuring of the Army, comparing the saving of 15,000 envisaged in the March Defence White Paper with his statement in the House on 15th April—

15-nation* Per cent.14-nation Per cent.l0-nation† Per cent.
Belgium4·605·303·96
Canada5·486·31Nil
Denmark3·073·545·94
Federal Republic of Germany21·8625·1842·33
France13·16NilNil
Greece0·660·760·85
IcelandNilNilNil
Italy6·587·5812·73
Luxembourg0·170·200·33
Netherlands4·234·878·20
Norway2·592·983·36
Portugal0·310·35Nil
Turkey1·101·262·13
United Kingdom10·4212·0020·17
United States25·7729·67Nil
* Since France terminated the assignment of forces to NATO commands in 1966 she has continued to contribute only to certain elements of the infrastructure programme.
† Costs of infrastructure projects completed as part of a supplementary European Defence Improvement Programme instituted in 1971 are shared by 10 members of the Alliance.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what will be the estimated United Kingdom contribution to the NATO infrastructure budget in the year 1975–76.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what are the main projects currently being funded by the NATO infrastructure budget.

It would not be in the best interests of the alliance to give details of individual projects. On-going work includes, for example, airfields, communications facilities, petrol, oil and lubricants, and storage and installations.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what percentage of the Budget of NATO has been contributed by

[col. 251]—which referred to a saving of 18,000 men.

The restructuring of the Army on the principles outlined in the Defence White Paper will give rise to a manpower reduction of about 15,000.