---

Royal Navy

Indeed, although I caution my hon. Friend against applying logic too closely to MOD policy, as he might find it lacking. The dubious rationale for the policy advanced by the Government is that what matters is capability, not platform numbers. That argument was elevated to the status of a doctrine by the then Secretary of State for Defence, the right hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Hoon), in a lecture at the Royal United Services Institute on 26 June 2003. He concluded that ““advances in technology”” and"““the astonishing speed with which we can increasingly operate””" meant that"““Measuring the capability of our Armed Forces by the number of units or platforms in their possession will no longer be significant””." Perhaps we cannot disregard increases in capability, but to say that measuring the number of units or platforms in the possession of our armed forces will no longer be significant strikes me as completely irresponsible. In response to that statement, the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, told the magazine Warships International Fleet Review, in an ““emperor’s new clothes”” moment, that"““no matter how good a ship is, it can only be in so many places at any one time.””" That was a specific rebuttal of the then Secretary of State’s argument that the number of units or platforms would no longer be significant in measuring the capability of the armed forces. Admiral Sir Alan West also pointed out that"““You need a lot of Type 45s to give the same coverage as a naval air-defence fighter.””—" a reference to the calculated risk taken in phasing the FA2 Sea Harrier six years before the joint combat aircraft was expected to come into service with the first of the new carriers in 2012.