Asked by Lord West of Spithead To ask His Majesty’s Government when
they expect to place orders for (1) multi-role support ships, and
(2) Type 32 frigates. The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence
(Baroness Goldie) (Con) My Lords, the multi-role support
ship—MRSS—and the Type 32 programmes remain in the concept phase
and have not yet reached the level of maturity for me to confirm
when orders are expected to be placed. The programme and
procurement strategy...Request free
trial
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government when they expect to place orders
for (1) multi-role support ships, and (2) Type 32 frigates.
The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence () (Con)
My Lords, the multi-role support ship—MRSS—and the Type 32
programmes remain in the concept phase and have not yet reached
the level of maturity for me to confirm when orders are expected
to be placed. The programme and procurement strategy for MRSS and
Type 32 will be decided following the concept phase.
(Lab)
My Lords, as I stand here today, our great maritime nation has 11
operational destroyers and frigates. Why are we in this parlous
state? The reason is that, for many years, up until fairly
recently, we have not been ordering ships on a rolling basis.
This is absolutely necessary for a proper shipbuilding industry.
Indeed, the Government recognise that now and, within the MoD,
Ministers understand the need for a rolling programme. We have
had some recent orders, but they have stopped. We must keep
ordering, otherwise we will have the same problem again. The
Treasury does not seem to understand that, if we do not do that,
the SMEs and all our trained people will go to the wall, we will
not have a proper shipbuilding industry and we will not have a
proper fleet. Could the Minister please go to the Treasury, point
out the error of its ways, and explain how important it is for us
to go down this route?
(Con)
I do not impugn the noble Lord’s right to hold the Government to
account but I would not wish his persistent interrogation and
commentary to imply that our Royal Navy is in some dysfunctional
state. The Royal Navy was one of the few navies in the world to
have ships in every ocean on the planet in 2022, from the High
North to the Antarctic, and from the Baltic to the Pacific. It
continues to deliver its commitments by undertaking the biggest
recapitalisation of the fleet in a generation, from Type 23 to 26
and 31, and from Vanguard to Dreadnought. It is worthwhile
reminding your Lordships that our Royal Navy is one of only three
navies in the world to be able to operate to fifth-generation
carriers and aircraft, along with the United States and China.
The Royal Navy is our British pride and joy. I wish that
sometimes the noble Lord, Lord West, would acknowledge that,
instead of repeatedly and monotonously talking down his former
service. It is time to champion it.
of Newnham (LD)
My Lords, I do not wish to talk down His Majesty’s Royal Navy.
However, like the noble Lord, Lord West, I am keen to ensure not
only that we have an effective rolling programme but that our
ships should be buoyant and seaworthy, ideally as soon as the
trials are over. With regard to moving from the concept phase for
the Type 32s, can the Minister tell the House what lessons His
Majesty’s Government have learned from procuring the Type 45s and
the “Queen Elizabeth” class so that, when the next ships go into
service, they will be seaworthy from day one?
(Con)
Again, to disabuse anyone of any misconception of the noble
Baroness’s question, we have a functional, operational Royal Navy
which is discharging its obligations to the country. As regards
the more recent types of shipbuilding commissioning by the Royal
Navy, such as the Type 26 and Type 31, part of their attraction
is their design concept, which means that they are more readily
produced, and they have an exportable value, and that means that
the sorts of problems to which the noble Baroness refers, which
certainly characterise some previous ships, are now much less
likely to materialise. What I described to the Chamber with
regard to what the Royal Navy is currently undertaking
demonstrates beyond a shred of a doubt that it is highly
professional, very well-equipped and functional.
(Con)
My Lords, is it not customary, in the year which sees the
Coronation of a new monarch, for the Royal Navy to be reviewed by
the new monarch? Will His Majesty review the fleet in the course
of the current year?
(Con)
That is a matter for the palace. However, I am sure that if His
Majesty were to review the fleet, it would be very positively
received.
(CB)
My Lords, the Minister has made some excellent points in defence
of our wonderful Royal Navy. However, the impressive response of
Ukraine in the current conflict demonstrates the rapidly changing
nature of warfare and the growing importance of agility and
flexibility. The Royal Navy is working hard to maximise these
latest technologies, including AI. Does the Minister agree that
the Type 32 frigate addresses all those developing
priorities?
(Con)
The Type 32 is conceived as an agile, resilient and capable ship.
However, I point out to the noble Lord that we have already, for
example, upgraded Type 45s with the Sea Viper Evolution programme
and upgraded Type 23s with the Naval Strike Missile in
partnership with the Norwegians—the first ship will be ready by
the end of the year. In addition, the initial Sonar Type 2150
ships have already been upgraded. We are constantly reviewing how
we can keep our fleet swift, agile and effective.
The Lord
My Lords, given that one of the intentions and evident benefits
of a national shipbuilding programme is local economic benefit,
including the levelling-up aims of investing in young people and
retraining older workers, and that shipyards are, by and large,
in areas of deprivation where such benefit is vital, will His
Majesty’s Government ensure that current capacity and design
skills, apprenticeship training and other essential
infrastructure is maintained pending the commitment to the Type
32 frigates and MRSS programmes so that it does not cost a great
deal more to initiate these vital programmes?
(Con)
I thank the right reverend Prelate for making a number of
extremely important points. The whole essence of the national
shipbuilding strategy was to ensure that we got shipbuilding in
the United Kingdom on to a more stable and sustainable basis. The
right reverend Prelate is absolutely right: the MoD’s direct
spend supports 29,800 jobs in the shipbuilding industry—that
includes submarines—with a further 21,300 jobs supported
indirectly. There is an opportunity for shipbuilding in the UK to
deliver exactly the sort of benefits to which the right reverend
Prelate refers.
(Lab)
Can the Minister explain how asking questions, however
persistently, about providing the Royal Navy with the equipment
that it needs is somehow talking it down?
(Con)
If the noble Lord had listened to my preface in response to the
noble Lord, Lord West, he would have heard me say that I do not
impugn the right of the noble Lord, Lord West, to hold the
Government to account. However, I think the Chamber would agree
that there is a certain predictability to the character of the
noble Lord’s questions; I know from first-hand experience the
volume of questions with which I have to deal. I am not impugning
his right to hold the Government to account but to do so
repetitively, without ever counterbalancing the argument by
acknowledging some of the Royal Navy’s enormous triumphs, gives a
slightly disproportionate and not totally representative
picture.
(Con)
My Lords, how many qualified crews do we have to support our
destroyers and frigates? Have any been deployed in recent days in
search for the missing mini-submarine near the “Titanic”?
(Con)
I have no information on my noble friend’s latter point. I can
seek specific information about the crew numbers to which he
refers and will write to him.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Type 32 frigate was announced on 19 November 2020.
I understand that, to make the national shipbuilding strategy
work, the first ship needs to be laid down by mid-2027. After two
years and seven months, the project is still in the pre-concept
stage. I think that means, in plain English, that we do not even
know what these ships are for. Can the Minister enlighten the
House, or will the project slip, so plunging the British
shipbuilding industry into chaos once again?
(Con)
I have already indicated to the House that this ship is in the
concept phase; there is no more that I can add to that. The
programme and procurement strategy will be decided following the
current concept phase, once that has concluded. However, I would
observe that this is part of a shipbuilding programme for the
Royal Navy that is substantial, significant and very important
for the Navy’s future operational effectiveness.
(CB)
My Lords, on this particular argument I find myself more in
favour of the Minister’s point, inasmuch as the lineage of these
questions, although entertaining, occasionally gives the
impression that the sole purpose of the defence budget is the
maritime renaissance. Increasingly, the issue of military
advantage will be born not of hardware but of software. Can the
Minister confirm that it is this strategic shift, and not
necessarily by accounting for military competence and capability
in the counting of input numbers, that is the qualitative output
of a sophisticated and technologically equipped Armed Forces—the
point of the Minister’s expression of frustration—and a more
balanced approach to the investment necessary?
(Con)
I thank the noble and gallant Lord. He makes the point more
eloquently and with greater authority than I can. I do not seek
to pre-empt the defence Command Paper refresh, which is
imminently in the stages of becoming public, but the hybrid
nature of our capability will be obvious from that paper. The
noble and gallant Lord is quite correct: we cannot put things in
silos. We have to work out what we are trying to deal with, what
the threat is, what the hybrid character of the threat is and how
we can have a capability—whether by land, air or sea—that will
effectively combine to address that threat.
|
