Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had
with BAE Systems to speed up the build rate of the Type 26
frigate; and what assessment they have made of the optimum build
rate to ensure best value for money.
(Con)
My Lords, ministerial colleagues and Ministry of Defence
officials have regular meetings with BAE Systems to discuss the
Type 26 frigate programme. On current plans, the average delivery
rate for vessel acceptance for the Type 26 batch 1 ships is the
optimum that can be achieved, considering all relevant factors.
It is expected to be one ship every 18 months. The time between
delivery of successive ships is not constant across the class.
(Lab)
My Lords, we are closer to a world war than at any stage during
the last 60 years. We must not delude ourselves into thinking
that our Armed Forces are capable of standing up to a peer enemy
in a face-to-face conflict. With that backdrop, which is
terrifying and horrifying, I was appalled that yesterday in the
Spring Statement there was no mention of extra money for defence.
The frigates are just one example. Basically, three of our
frigates pay off in the next 12 months, and more after that. The
first one to start replacing them comes in five years; the last
of the eight Type 26s comes in 2043. God knows how many wars we
will have had by then. May I ask the Minister to go back to the
Secretary of State for Defence and ask him to plead with the
Chancellor for extra funding? Our nation has understood for
centuries that, when under military threat, we need fighting
power. What has changed?
(Con)
I hope I can reassure the noble Lord. He will have been present
for the messages which came out last week from my noble friend
Lady Goldie on the whole of our shipbuilding programme. Regarding
the specific questions on the Type 26 frigates, we are committed
to building eight. As the noble Lord knows, the first three ships
are under construction on the Clyde. The first, HMS “Glasgow”, is
doing well, as are HMS “Cardiff” and HMS “Belfast”. Batch 2, with
the five others, is on track. There is no issue over funding. The
funding has been set, including for batch 2, although the
contracts have yet to be awarded. I hope that is some reassurance
for the noble Lord, who knows so much about this subject.
(Con)
My Lords, the security situation has changed dramatically in the
last four weeks. It is beyond comprehension that the Chancellor
should deliver a Statement yesterday and mention neither the
international situation nor defence. It was always the top Tory
priority, and it is time that it became the priority again.
(Con)
It certainly does remain a priority. Again, I must reassure my
noble friend that defence is playing a central role in the UK’s
response to the Russian invasion. It is not about funding. We
will continue to work closely with our allies and partners to
fully understand the rapidly changing situation on the ground. We
continue to offer a collective response that is robust and
proportionate.
of Newnham (LD)
My Lords, the Minister in his answers is clearly seeking to
reassure the House. However, I am afraid that from these Benches,
I am not reassured. His answer to the noble Lord, Lord West, was
that the rate of build for the Type 26 frigates was “optimum”
given “all relevant factors”. What are those relevant factors,
and have they been reassessed since the Russian invasion of
Ukraine four weeks ago today?
(Con)
I hope to reassure the noble Baroness because the factors
include, as she is well aware, the gearbox delivery issues for
the Type 26. Some flexibility on the timing was allowed for. It
is unique, complex and built to extremely fine tolerances, but it
has been delivered. We are on time for this programme, for both
batch 1 and batch 2. There should be complete reassurance on that
front.
(CB)
My Lords, I also find the Minister’s answer about the Type 26
build rate disappointing, particularly given how long it is
before the first Type 26 comes into service. It will certainly
see our frigate force level drop to being unacceptably low before
the new ships come online. Will the Minister say what level our
frigate numbers will sink to before the new ships become
operational? That also includes the Type 31.
(Con)
Again, I reassure the noble and gallant Lord that we have a very
clear programme of rolling out shipbuilding. It includes, for the
first time, the Type 26s and the Type 31s. It is very important
to say, first, that our current capability is absolutely fine
and, secondly, that we will have two types of frigate on stream
by the end of the decade.
(Con)
Our frigates are really of any use to us only if they are armed.
We have, of course, rightly in recent weeks donated a lot of arms
to Ukraine, including 4,000 NLAWs. Can my noble friend reassure
your Lordships’ House that an order has been placed to replace
those weapons and that, crucially, they will be paid for not by
the MoD budget but by the Treasury contingency fund?
(Con)
I can say to my noble friend and to the House that we will
continue in the UK to support the Ukrainian Government in the
face of this appalling assault on Ukrainian sovereignty and
territorial integrity. We are liaising daily with the Ukrainian
Government to continue to respond to their request to supply more
defensive military equipment. To answer the question, the UK has
granted in-kind assets and infantry to Ukraine, and these have
come from MoD stocks or have been purchased. Where the
replenishment of stocks is required, it is expected to be funded
from the Treasury special reserve.
(GP)
My Lords, a highly placed mole in the Royal Navy—it was not
him—has told me that, as much as a decade ago, senior officers
were extremely worried about the impact of climate change, which
was also not mentioned in the Chancellor’s speech yesterday. Why
has the UK military still not got any net-zero carbon targets?
(Lab)
I was not the mole. [Laughter.]
(Con)
Maybe there should be a leak inquiry—but perhaps I should not go
there. On the noble Baroness’s question, of course, she makes a
regular point about climate change. However, I can reassure her,
particularly on the national shipbuilding programme—I think she
was present for the Statement from my noble friend Lady
Goldie—that there is much going on. She will have read that big
document about ensuring that our future warships in our
shipbuilding strategy will be of a clean nature.
(Con)
My Lords, can my noble friend tell me how many destroyers and
frigates are presently available to the Royal Navy?
(Con)
I start by saying that we have an improving picture in fleet
availability, which is the result of targeted interventions to
minimise support requirements, improve maintenance and generate
ships faster. Perhaps to reassure my noble friend, in May 2021
there were 935 ship days at sea, the most since July 2014. May I
also say, although I cannot of course give too much out, that,
for example, there are at least 10 fully operational ships at sea
now? That includes “HMS “Diamond” in the east Mediterranean, HMS
“Northumberland”, from that TV series, which noble Lords may have
watched, which is taking part in normal deployment, and many
more.
(Lab)
The Minister has an elegant way of saying no. The MoD confirmed
funding last summer for the second batch of five Type 26
frigates. Given that the national shipbuilding strategy failed to
commit to a British-built by default approach to procurement, can
the Government confirm that this batch will be built in UK
shipyards with UK steel?
(Con)
I am pleased to say that the steel aspect of HMS “Glasgow” comes
up to about 50%. The noble Lord will know, however, that steel
manufacture for ships has to be very precise and, at the moment,
the UK is not capable of producing the type of thin steel for
frigates—or, indeed, the thick steel for submarines, which is
another matter. But I can reassure him that the £3.7 billion
contract to manufacture the first batch of Type 26s, which was
awarded in 2017, is on track.
(CB)
Yesterday, in answer to a Question on defence expenditure, the
noble Baroness, Lady Penn, gave an alarmingly complacent answer,
seeming to indicate that the defence budget that had been settled
pre-Ukraine remained perfectly satisfactory. In effect, she was
saying that her right honourable colleague the Foreign Secretary
was dead wrong. May I ask the Minister whether this is the
corporate Cabinet view?
(Con)
It is very much unlike my noble friend on the Front Bench to
sound complacent. Even before the events of the past two years,
the Government bolstered defence spending with the greatest
supplement since the Cold War—an extra £24 billion over the next
four years. That has enabled us, once again, to make sure that we
have a proper defence programme and is a reform that puts men and
women in the Armed Forces at the heart of what we do.
(Con)
My Lords, how much worse do things have to get in Ukraine before
we substantially lift the 2% of GDP that we spend on defence?
(Con)
Very quickly, I think the answer I gave to my noble friend Lord
Lancaster applies.
