Skip to main content

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


Royal Navy

I wholly agree with my hon. Friend and need say no more than that. At the moment, there is a problem in respect of the ownership of DML, and that is a little unsettling. However, I have no doubt that, once those matters are resolved, the work force will settle down and do what they do best—that is, provide design, build and support solutions to the Navy. The Opposition’s motion refers specifically to the new aircraft carriers. There are those in this House who cannot see the logic for the development of the carriers and would prefer to see the surface fleet further enhanced. Yes, such investment would bring additional capability, but neither the versatility nor the flexibility that the carriers can offer. The new CVF will involve the largest vessels ever to have seen service in the Royal Navy, displacing some 65,000 tonnes and capable of supporting an air wing of about 50 aircraft. The carriers bring a strategic platform; it is like parking a small island, with all that that can offer, off the coast of an area close to a military theatre. Frigates and destroyers cannot do that. If we face conflict in a region where we have no close allies prepared to allow us to use them as a base, the demand for such vessels becomes very clear. Today’s Navy is being asked to carry out tasks differently from how it was expected to two or three decades ago. The trainees and staff whom I met recently at HMS Raleigh understood well their role in the modern Navy; I should like to put on record how impressed I was by the young people whom I met. It is right that the MOD and the Royal Navy should seek to procure vessels that meet the flexible requirements of the future—the vessels on which the young men and women who walk through HMS Raleigh’s gates will serve. It is, of course, also right that the MOD should take care to ensure that it is absolutely clear what the new carriers should cost before setting a contractual price for the industry to tilt at. Like most Members of this House, the Defence Committee included, I want the project to be taken forward and the Ministry to get best value for the taxpayer while ensuring that what is procured is what the Navy needs. I look forward to my hon. Friend’s response at the end of this debate. The carriers working alongside the new Type 45s and the new Astute class submarines, providing improved air capability, will continue to do what the UK needs to protect our shores and our citizens.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
457 c677-8 
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