---

Defence Policy

As the hon. Gentleman can imagine, this matter is being addressed in the corridors of the Ministry of Defence as we speak. There are a number of options, including retaining the Harriers for longer periods. Again, I do not want to make the obvious layman's point, but if we are going to spend £4 billion on two new aircraft carriers, we must have some proper aircraft to fly from them. There would be no point in deploying the ships, even if we could properly protect them—and we will be able to do so—if they are not able to deploy on operations because there is no kit to fly from them. I assure him that when these carriers go to sea, they will be properly equipped and fully resourced. Any idea that UK troops on operations are under-equipped is out-of-date, ill-informed and inaccurate. May I turn to the challenge of building for the future? We cannot build for the future unless defence is well funded. Operations in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq and Afghanistan have borne out the strategic defence review's vision of a flexible, agile, expeditionary force structure, and we will continue on that transformational path. At the same time, the continuance of our nuclear deterrent will remain a fundamental part of Britain's defence policy, with a new generation of submarines to replace the Vanguard class—designed and built, with pride, in my constituency—in the years ahead. Since the comprehensive spending review, the defence budget will benefit from average annual real growth of more than 1.5 per cent. By 2010-11, the defence budget will be £3 billion higher in real terms than it was in 1997. That contrasts with the fact that defence spending fell in each year of the previous Conservative Government. In addition to the CSR settlement, some £9.5 billion has been provided from the Treasury reserve to meet the additional costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. Like every other Department, the Ministry of Defence needs to live within its means.