Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Adam Ingram (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 26 February 2007. It occurred during Opposition day on Royal Navy.


Royal Navy

I beg to move, To leave out from ““House”” to end and add:"““notes with approval the Government’s very considerable investment in new warship building, including the new Type 45 destroyers, of which two have already been launched, the new Astute class nuclear submarines, the first of which will be launched later this year, and the two Future Aircraft Carriers, which will be the largest ships ever to serve with the Royal Navy; notes that 28 new ships have entered service with the Royal Navy since 1997; views with concern ill-informed and inaccurate suggestions that warships will be ‘mothballed’; and congratulates the Government for its responsible stewardship of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines during a period of extremely high operational tempo.’." I am grateful to the Opposition for having raised this importance issue for defence at this time. It is just a pity we do not have an Adjournment debate on defence today, because I might have had the benefit of participating in that as well. However, this debate provides us with an opportunity to acknowledge the breadth of the Navy’s contribution and to clear up some of the confusion that evidently exists about its capability. The contribution of the hon. Member for Woodspring (Dr. Fox) was a solid one, but he set some hares running that do not quite add up. He also carefully avoided the crunch question, which all Oppositions face as they scent what they believe to be power: are they going to make the spending commitments necessary to live up to their rhetoric and analysis? We wait with interest to see how that approach is going to develop over the months and years ahead. I note in passing that the hon. Member for Moray (Angus Robertson) is in place. I look forward to his contribution, if he catches your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker. He can tell us about the importance of the Royal Navy to Scotland—not just in Faslane and Rosyth, but elsewhere in the country—and how small that contribution would be with an independent Scottish navy. In his opening comments, the hon. Member for Woodspring made a lot of play on the contribution of the previous First Sea Lord, which was forceful. He argued his corner well, but in his comments he also disparaged the existing First Sea Lord. [Interruption.] He made two references. The second was a quote and the first was a diminution of the role played by the existing First Sea Lord. Let me tell hon. Members—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
457 c653-4 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Armed forces Deployment Defence equipment Finance Staff Navy Warships Aircraft carriers Submarines
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk