asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he intends any adjustment of the policies of his Department, in view of Her Majesty's Government's anti-inflationary policy as outlined in the White Paper, The Attack on Inflation, Command Paper No. 6151.

Only in the same way that every other Department will have to adjust its practices to implement the measures.

Has the closure of the Admiralty armament depot at Brandeath anything to do with the Government's anti-inflation policy? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is rather anomalous for his Department, at this time of economic crisis, to be involved in an increase in public expenditure as well as contributing to an increase in unemployment? Will he consult the Department of Employment about this aspect of the problem?

No decision has been made to close the Royal Naval Arma- ment Depot at Brandeath, and this has nothing to do with the anti-inflationary policy, but if closure proposals for defence establishments, either due to the Defence Review or to rationalisation, concern Brandeath, the staff and the trade unions will be fully consulted.

Will not the Secretary of State agree that, no matter how many White Papers there have been since, the Defence White Paper represents the Government's view of the absolute minimum expenditure necessary to maintain our security? Is that still the Government's view?

Yes, I am still planning defence based upon the proposals in the last Defence White Paper, other than the £110 million cut in the last budgetary statement.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that, whatever cuts are made, they will not impair the ability of the Regular reserve forces to do training? Is he aware that there is grave concern in both forces that the lack of petrol, for one thing, is making them unable to undertake training? Is he further aware that there is the possibility in the near future—I say this without wishing to be an alarmist—of having units not trained because they have been unable to go on exercises?

I am afraid that I cannot give my hon. Friend the complete assurances that he would like. The increase in oil costs and the effects of the defence review are bound to have some effect on training. Nevertheless, my hon. Friend will have noticed that we are now in the midst of an exercise called "Inside Right" in which we are carrying out the mobilisation procedures of both Regulars and the TAVR.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Britain spends no less than 5·2 per cent. of her gross national product on defence, whereas the average for the 11 NATO countries, excluding Portugal, is 2·7 per cent., and with Portugal included only 3·3 per cent.? Why is it that Britain has to spend so much more as a percentage of her GNP than the other NATO countries?

No doubt my hon. Friend will catch up with what the Defence White Paper revealed some months ago. Because we have been expending cash on overseas or international commitments which are not purely NATO but have now decided to withdraw from our major bases overseas, we are now carrying out the Manifesto commitment to bring down our defence expenditure in line with that of our major European allies, and during the course of the next four years we shall be saving £2,000 million.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the effect so far on the policies and expenditure of his Department in the light of Her Majesty's Government's anti-inflationary policy as outlined in the White Paper, The Attack on Inflation.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier this afternoon to my hon. Friend the Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan).

What is the value of colossal military might if it means economic bankruptcy? Did not my right hon. Friend contradict himself earlier this afternoon? Did he not say that the economies would affect arms only in the same way as other Departments were affected, and a minute later also say that his policy was still based on the defence White Paper? Surely in the light of the present economic situation he must review his arms White Paper and conduct a second review forthwith?

Until the public expenditure survey is complete my defence policy is based on the last Defence White Paper. I cannot put it more clearly than that.

As jobs in the defence industries are being so badly affected by inflation, does not the right hon. Gentleman consider in retrospect that it was wrong of him to commit himself to buying missiles from abroad without at the same time getting a categoric assurance from the United States and France that they would buy British equipment? Will he give an assurance that he will not sign on the dotted line for these orders until there are reciprocal orders from those other two countries?

I have indicated that the orders are subject to negotiations with the French and the Americans. The hon. Member will probably be aware that on the American deal the United States Secretary of State Mr. Schlesinger came to the United Kingdom two or three weeks ago. During the course of that visit we both signed a memorandum of understanding dealing with defence equipment sales between Britain and America hoping that gradually over a period of time we should be able to rectify the imbalance in the purchases of defence equipment. No doubt that MOU will be borne in mind when we negotiate on Sub-Harpoon.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence when he next expects to meet the other NATO Defence Ministers.

I expect to meet my Eurogroup colleagues on 5th November and 8th December. The next meeting of the NATO Defence Planning Committee in Ministerial session will be on 9th and 10th December.

What consultations has the Secretary of State had with other NATO Defence Ministers about ensuring that Gan is not used by the Soviet Union if we withdraw?

I have had no consultations with my NATO colleagues about the future of the island yet, because initially consultations must take place between the Foreign Office and the Maldivian Government. We may be able to extract an agreement to maintain the island with the Maldivians until the present agreement expires, but this will be entirely up to the Foreign Office when it negotiates with the Maldivian Government.

Will my right hon. Friend tell the House what discussions he has had or is likely to have with his NATO colleagues regarding the rationalisation of costs, equipment, repairs and spare parts among NATO members? Can he allay in any way the fears that many of us have that there is a massive waste of public money because of non-rationalisation among NATO members?

I am sure that my hon. Friend will recognise that, as chairman of the Eurogroup Ministers within NATO, I have been urging upon my NATO colleagues the need for standardisation of equipment within NATO. The meeting that we are to have on 5th November will devote all its sessions to that purpose.

Will the Secretary of State bear in mind that all his NATO colleagues have stated that they regard our cuts as gravely damaging to the alliance? As the Chief of Defence Staff said recently on television that our defence efforts were down to bedrock, will he assure our NATO allies that he has made all the cuts he intends to make and that we shall be good allies from now on and keep up our contributions to NATO?

It is correct that my NATO colleagues were concerned about the outcome of the Defence Review. I am sorry to say that I am unable to give them a categorical assurance that that is the final limit of our defence expenditure levels. I am sure all hon. Members know that public expenditure is under survey and that means all Departments, including the Ministry of Defence.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence how many men will be saved as a result of the proposed reorganisation of the Army in Germany without the traditional brigade structure; and what trials it is intended to hold of the proposed new small divisional concept.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Younger) on 15th April on the question of manpower savings. On the re-organisation of the command structure, extensive trials are already under way and will continue over the next year or so to prove this new concept.

Will the Minister explain why this fundamental and vital reorganisation affecting commands, supplies, tactics and training—the major reform of the Army since before the First World War—has been made a commitment of the Ministry before any trials were carried out? Surely it would have made sense to have had the trials before committing ourselves to restructuring completely the whole of the Army?

We are satisfied that the overall concept is sound. The main purpose of the trials is to get the details right and to assess the operational procedures, communications, and so on.

Does the Under-Secretary accept that the country has a right to be satisfied as well? Will he give an undertaking that the Defence White Paper due to be published in February will contain a full evaluation of this experiment, an analysis of the logistical costs which will be involved in redeployment of units in BAOR, and also an assessment of the units that are to be disbanded in these cuts, units whose identities have not been announced since June? I understand that they are to include the Guards Independent Parachute Squadron and at least two batteries of Royal Artillery?

The hon. Gentleman should know that I announced in the Army debate that no cap badge units would be directly affected. The reorganisation is envisaged to be effective from 1st April 1979, but, of course, evaluation of the trials will take place long before that date. I am not prepared to give any undertaking about next year's White Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence when he next expects to meet the French Defence Minister.

M. Bourges paid a visit to London at my invitation on 13th and 14th October. I am looking forward to a further meeting with him in due course.

When the Secretary of State next meets the French Defence Minister will he attempt to make arrangements whereby pilots of the Fleet Air Arm can fly from the decks of French aircraft carriers after HMS "Ark Royal" has been phased out? Does he not agree that it is essential that these skills be retained by the country as a matter of national importance?

I thought that we had assured the House that that was being done. As the through-deck cruiser programme is intact and the maritime Harrier has been ordered, those skills to which the hon. Gentleman has referred will be maintained.

Is the Secretary of State confident that the programming of British and French Polaris submarines is suitably co-ordinated?

No, Sir. No nuclear exchanges were discussed with the French.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a further statement on the future of the Polaris Base on the West of Scotland.

We made clear in our election manifesto that starting from the basis of multilateral disarmament negotiations we would seek the removal of American Polaris bases from Britain. We may be able to initiate such multilateral disarmament negotiations once the present talks on mutual and balanced force reductions in Central Europe are concluded.

Members of the public who are concerned with security sometimes gain the impression, I am sure quite wrongly, that speeches by Labour Members or decisions of Labour conferences represent Government policy. Will the Secretary of State make clear beyond a shadow of doubt that it is the Government's intention to maintain the effectiveness of our Polaris forces and that there is no question of the Polaris bases being removed unless that is part of a unilateral agreement for disarmament?

The British Polaris force is a significant contribution to NATO and plays its part in the triad of conventional, tactical-nuclear, and strategic defences of NATO. I have stated on many occasions that we intend to maintain the effectiveness of the Polaris deterrent.

Although I appreciate the Minister's answer to that question, may I point out that a great deal of uncertainty is felt by the people in those areas, especially concerning the American base? Will he say definitely whether the American base will continue after the next two years or so?

We have stated often in the past that we consider the American base desirable in our common defence, but we put before the electorate on two occasions last year the proposal that we should within the course of multilateral disarmament negotiations seek the withdrawal of the American base from Britain. After the Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction conference and the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks, Part II, have been completed, we may be able to open those talks.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total stock of service accommodation in the United Kingdom; and what is the average length of time a house or other unit of accommodation remains vacant in the United Kingdom and in Plymouth, respectively.

At present the Services have some 103,000 married quarters and hirings in the United Kingdom. The period when quarters are empty between tenants is normally up to two or three weeks throughout the United Kingdom, but in cases of modernisation or redeployment of units the period is inevitably longer.

Is the Minister satisfied with the arrangements that are made for ex-Service men, because this is a problem which concerns many local authorities, especially my own, which is a Service constituency?

We have not been satisfied in the past, because it is important that when people leave the Services, where they have been accustomed to having accommodation, they should find somewhere satisfactory to live. As the hon. Lady will know, a circular giving further advice has recently been sent to local authorities. We shall do all we possibly can to meet what I agree is a serious problem.

Is the Minister aware that the circular to which he refers urging housing authorities to give specially sympathetic consideration to ex-Service men when applying for council houses is more honoured in the breach than the observance? Is he aware that in Lincolnshire I have had difficulty in finding council house accommodation for ex-Service men and that more co-ordination is needed?

In my experience, the circular is more honoured in the observance than in the breach. Ofter local authorities have acute housing problems of their own. If the hon. Gentleman would like to give me details of particularly difficult cases, I shall be glad to look at them.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what steps are being taken by Her Majesty's Government in pursuit of their policy to preserve the credibility of NATO strategy.

NATO strategy is founded on the triad of conventional, tactical nuclear and strategic nuclear forces. In all three areas the Government intend to maintain an effective British contribution to the alliance.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's recent answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Mr. Younger) that there was no guarantee that further defence cuts would not take place, how does he intend to preserve the credibility of NATO strategy? Is he aware of the remarks by Doctor Joseph Luns in Copenhagen on 25th September when he deplored the unilateral cuts of individual NATO countries? Is the Minister aware that if he continues with his policy his triad may well become a Troika?

I am still hopeful that I shall be able to continue to maintain the new posture of our NATO role of working within the central region, within the Eastern Atlantic, and within the security of the home base.

What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure the closest co-operation with our ally Norway?

As the hon. Gentleman may be aware, we have just received the Norwegian Secretary of State for Defence who is on a Ministerial visit to this country. Talks will be taking place with him during the course of this week.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what is his current estimate of the future life of the Polaris weapons system.

Many years yet.

What does my right hon. Friend mean by "many years yet"? Does it represent a departure from the view of the previous Conservative Government that Polaris had an effective life until the late 1980s? If it represents a departure from that view, what has happened to enable the Government to depart from that view?

No; I cannot be more specific than that. Without replacing the present Polaris system, there are still many years of life left in the system.

Is the Minister considering holding a nuclear test explosion at Nevada? If so, is it connected with updating or improving the Polaris warhead?

I have explained to the House on more than one occasion that maintaining the effectiveness of the present deterrent may necessitate further tests and I have indicated already that there may be—I put it no higher than that—a need for another test some time next year.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he is satisfied with the level of co-ordination of defence policy between the United Kingdom and France.

Yes, Sir.

At a time when Britain is being criticised for standing up for its own interests by adopting a non-Community approach on energy, is it not ironic that France should still refuse to play a full and active part in NATO? Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that we were told that membership of the Common Market was essential for the defence of Europe? Will he suggest to the French that until they adopt such a full and active rôle they, unlike us, are not being good Europeans?

No, I would not be as blunt as to tell the French that. France happens to be a member of NATO, but, whereas we are integrated into the military structure, France is not. However, France maintains a military mission to the Military Committee of NATO and is fully aware of NATO developments.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the French have always complained about the over-weaning influence of the United States in the Atlantic Alliance? Does he agree that if he were to make a success—as chairman of the Eurogroup—of the so-called two-way street in the passage of armaments, this would be a great incentive for France to rejoin the military side of the Atlantic Alliance?

Yes, and I should applaud that posture were France to adopt it. My hon. Friend knows that there is a vacant chair in the Eurogroup and the French can join the group at any time they wish. I drew this fact to the attention of my French colleague during the course of discussions with him last week. He is fully aware of the likely outcome of defence equipment moving from Europe to America and vice versa if the two-way street concept gets off the ground.

In view of the recent purchase of the French missile Milan, will the Secretary of State say what the French are purchasing from us?

The Question concerns defence policy and not defence sales. There was not a British equivalent of Milan available in the time scale in which we wanted it. We are to negotiate with the French to purchase Milan hoping to get production work in Britain and then be involved in the mid-term improvements of the missile.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence in what circumstances a minor may be released from the Army service earlier than the date laid down in the regulations.

I apologise, Mr. Speaker, for the length of this reply, but it is necessary if I am to reply properly to my hon. Friend's question.

What course of action would my hon. Friend recommend to a 17-year old soldier from my constituency who has been trying for months to obtain his release from the Army, who has made repeated representations to that effect through me and others, who has even gone to the length of running away from the Army, only to be forcibly returned, but who is still told that he cannot be released? Is it not insupportable in a supposedly civilised country that a 17-year old boy should be kept in the Army against his will as a virtual prisoner?

I think that my hon. Friend knows well enough that I have given a great deal of consideration to the case to which he refers and that the youngster concerned has had a number of interviews with his commanding officer. It seems that the boy himself tends to wish to continue his service. Nevertheless, many youngsters come under pressure from parents and others. This is a case that I have constantly under review. I assure my hon. Friend that if the circumstances arise where a discharge becomes obviously necessary I will see to it.

Is the Ministry taking special steps in present circumstances to draw the attention of school leavers, many of whom are experiencing difficulty in obtaining employment, to the advantages of a Service life?

I should have thought that if the hon. and gallant Gentleman had been watching the Service advertisements he would have realised that the Ministry was taking steps. We are not taking any particular steps, but we have appealed to youngsters for many years.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make a statement about the operations in support of the civil powers in Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the operation of the security forces in Northern Ireland.

Army operations continue throughout Northern Ireland to assist the Royal Ulster Constabulary in the task of combating violence and terrorism. Recent upsurges in violence, particularly in South Armagh, have been met with prompt and firm action on the part of the security forces. An additional infantry battalion is in the Province as a temporary reinforcement and a range of extra selective security measures have been adopted in the areas affected. We are watching the situation very closely and we shall continue to match our operations on the ground to the level of violence in any area.

First, I welcome what has been said about South Armagh. Would the Under-Secretary venture to say that Her Majesty's Forces have now regained the terrorist-occupied territories in South Armagh for the United Kingdom? Secondly, in view of the complaints, now widespread on both sides of the sea, that the forces fight with one hand tied, will Her Majesty's Government do more to explain to the public the political and military considerations governing their policy?

I indicated in my original answer that we had taken the necessary steps—not to regain control, because there was never any question of loss of control. It was an increase of violence in a certain area which caused us to increase our cover in the area.

Has the Under-Secretary seen the article in the Army magazine Visor which suggests that the Army is concerned about the cease-fire which seems to be honoured only by our own security forces? As 40 soldiers have been killed in South Armagh, is it not time that our security operations in the Province as a whole were reviewed?

The whole House will be concerned about the breaches of the ceasefire. The Provisional IRA has claimed responsibility for a number of incidents which were clear breaches of the ceasefire. Two of the most tragic incidents were, first, the explosion near Forkhill on 17th July which killed four soldiers and injured another, and, secondly, an explosion under an Army personnel carrier near Crossmaglen on 9th October which killed one soldier and injured four other soldiers and a Royal Ulster Constabulary constable.

Are the operations of the defence forces affected by communications received from the incident centres and if so, in what respect?

Any information received from the centres is given consideration but would not determine security forces' operations in their entirety, if that is what the right hon. Gentleman was suggesting.

Is the Minister confident that we now have the activities of the UDA under control?

It would be a bold Minister who would state from this Box that we had under control every organisation in the Province at any one time.

Would not the Minister agree that our security forces are still carrying out their immensely difficult task in Northern Ireland with creditable skill and patience and can he assure us that when the forces see a wanted person in their area, they give every possible assistance to the RUC in apprehending him and getting him arrested?

I am grateful for the hon. Member's initial comments. I have said before, but it is worth repetition, that there is no other Army in the world that could have carried out the unenviable task of the British Army in Northern Ireland with the same good will. It does not matter from which area law breakers may come and whatever their religion—the forces will give all possible support to the RUC to get these people into court to pay the price for some of the heinous offences now being committed in the Province.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of the amphibious warfare forces.

I would refer the hon. Member to the information given in the Statement on the Defence Estimates 1975, and to what I said in the Navy Debate on 9th July.

Can the Minister assure us that when the cuts already announced have become effective, we shall still have an effective amphibious force and that there is still a NATO role for it, particularly on the flanks of the alliance?

We have a full and important rôle for our amphibious forces, although at a reduced level, particularly on the northern flank, where they have already demonstrated their effectiveness with considerable success in exercises with the Norwegian forces.

Can the Minister explain how the forces are to operate when "Bulwark" is scrapped and "Hermes" converted to an anti-submarine rôle? Will the new through-deck cruisers have an amphibious capability and has he considered commandeering or requisitioning cross-Channel steamers to carry the marines in future?

"Hermes" will continue to have a secondary rôle as a commando carrier. "Fearless" and "Intrepid" still have a long and useful life ahead of them. We are always examining ways in which we can raise alternative means of shipping to ensure maximum flexibility in the deployment of our NATO forces.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will make a statement on the latest posi- tion with regard to Great Britain's contribution to NATO.

The United Kingdoms contribution to NATO is set out in detail in the Statement on the Defence Estimates 1975 (Cmnd. 5976). Since the publication of the statement, the appointment of the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Strike Command as a NATO major subordinate commander and consequent extension of his responsibilities have enabled us to make naval and air forces, including nearly 200 aircraft, more readily available to the alliance in an emergency.

On Trafalgar Day, has the Secretary of State considered that the greatest and fastest growing threat to NATO now lies at sea with a confrontation below the level of declared war? Has he considered whether the British contribution, which is a more maritime one, would be more effective in preventing war rather than waging it?

I would have thought that on Trafalgar Day the hon. and gallant Member would first have praised the fact that we have the through-deck cruiser programme, that the maritime Harrier is coming, that we have ordered Sub-Harpoon and that we are developing Sea Skewer. He should be standing up in praise of the Navy on Trafalgar Day.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that our contribution to NATO constitutes a heavy burden on our economy which we cannot afford to expand and which many of us think it is doubtful that we shall be able to sustain? Could he confirm that it is our policy to seek, at least eventually, the winding-up of all military alliances, including NATO?

I part company from my hon. Friend on this matter. He should understand, as I am sure most of the British people do, that because of our contribution to the alliance and because NATO exists, we have had 30 years of peace in Europe—the longest span of peace in the last 200 years. If that collapses, our security will be at risk.

Without dissenting from the right hon. Member's concluding remarks and in the hope that my question will not prompt him to pay himself further compliments, may I ask whether he is aware that the strength of our contribution to NATO must depend on the strength of the nation's economy and that that in turn depends very much on the strength of our defence industry? Is he aware that many people are alarmed by the way the future of the industry has been prejudiced by the conclusion of contracts to buy weapons from overseas without any corresponding firm agreement on work in this country or for reciprocal purchases by our NATO partners?

There cannot be painless defence cuts and when there are military requirements in order that our forces shall have the best equipment in the right time scale, it is necessary to look abroad as well as at home. When the package was made to purchase the British Sea Skewer, the French-German Milan and the American Sub-Harpoon, I managed to equip the forces at a cost of £100 million less than buying all-British. I cannot afford to ignore that.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence, in view of the fact that Mr. David Burnside was dismissed from the Ulster Defence Regiment for being a member of the Vanguard Unionist Party, whether he will make a statement on whether all members of that party are to be excluded from the Regiment, and as to which other parties are similarly affected.

Members of the UDR are treated exactly the same as members of the Regular Army regarding the expression of political views. A member of the UDR may be a member of a political party, including the Vanguard Unionist Party, but he may not take any active part in the affairs of any political organisation or party.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that there are other serving members of the UDR who are actively involved in politics? If he wants names and parties, I am quite willing to submit them. If he is aware of this, we are left with no alternative but to believe that Mr. Burnside has been discriminated against. Would he not agree that it is nothing less than deceitful to discharge him for political involvement when the regiment knew at the time of his admission that he was actively involved in politics?

If the hon. Member has the details he mentions, I shall be pleased to see them. Mr. Burnside was not expelled because of his membership of this organisation, but because of his activity in it. After an article in the Sunday News on 18th May, Mr. Burnside was warned by his commanding officer that he could not be an active member of a political party and remain a member of the UDR. On 2nd June, Mr. Burnside issued a statement as Press officer of the Vanguard Unionist Party and as a result of his continued active involvement in politics he was discharged.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set up a specially equipped force to protect North Sea oil rigs and pipelines from possible terrorist attacks.

No, Sir.

Does the Minister agree that the problems of security on oil rigs and pipelines are in certain important respects unique, and that in particular there needs to be a regular review of the liaison arrangements among the civil police, the Royal Air Force, the Royal Navy and Government Departments? Will he undertake to keep the liaison arrangements under close review, and in doing so will he pay particular attention to the recent lectures and articles by Professor Donald Watt of the London School of Economics, who spelled out the case for such a special force in some detail?

The problems certainly are unique. Equally, to review present arrangements is right, and we have frequent and continuing consultation with the Offshore Operations Association, among others. The answer to all the hon. Member's questions must therefore be "Yes".

Will my right hon. Friend comment on the success of the security forces in dealing with the bomb hoax on the rigs in the North Sea during the recess?

My hon. Friend is correst in saying that this was a successful operation. In so far as there were lessons to be learnt, they will be learnt.

In view of the Minister's answer, what is the purpose of the force of five or six ships that have been ordered?

The hon. Member for Thanet, East (Mr. Aitken) asked whether we would set up a specially equipped force. The answer to that Question is that I made a statement on 11th February making special provision for this purpose. The answer I gave to the hon. Member was therefore correct.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence when were the last exercises held for the reinforcement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's northern flank; and if he is satisfied with the United Kingdom's capability in this respect.

The last NATO reinforcement exercises on the Northern Flank, Exercises "Northern Merger" and "Bold Guard", were held during September 1974. The answer to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's Question is "Yes".

Will the Minister reconsider that reply in the light of the defence cuts, and will he also consider the command structure on the northern flank in view of the importance of the maritime and air rather than the land forces on that front?

I made my reply in the light of the defence cuts, and I therefore cannot depart from it. The northern flank will be of continuing concern to us and we shall review the possibilities.

Will my right hon. Friend resist the blandishments of the Opposition who are constantly demanding cuts in every other service while pressing for increases in defence expenditure?

I shall resist blandishments from wherever they may come.

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will now abandon all work on the Multi-Rôle Combat Aircraft project.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in view of the number of projects in the 1950s and 1960s which cost millions of pounds only subsequently to be scrapped, and in view of the number of projects for hospitals, schools, and old people's homes for which the Government cannot find the money, many people feel that the Government have a ludicrous set of priorities in these matters?

I cannot share the hon. Member's view. I think that we are all agreed that this country must be properly defended, and whereas it is right at all times to examine every project, I am satisfied that the MRCA can be justified. The hon. Member should consider the present employment consequences of the sort of cancellation he seems to envisage.

Am I right in supposing that the alternative to the MRCA—the American F 14—would cost $50 million?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Those who propose to cancel the MRCA must indicate the alternative they have in mind. I believe that all the options are less satisfactory and more expensive.