Moved by Baroness Chapman of Darlington That the draft Order laid
before the House on 23 May be approved. The Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab) My Lords, in December
2022, the United Kingdom, Japan and Italy jointly launched the
global combat air programme, known as GCAP, to deliver
next-generation aircraft by 2035. On 5 July, the Prime Minister
reaffirmed the UK's...Request free
trial
Moved by
of Darlington
That the draft Order laid before the House on 23 May be
approved.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth
and Development Office ( of Darlington) (Lab)
My Lords, in December 2022, the United Kingdom, Japan and Italy
jointly launched the global combat air programme, known as GCAP,
to deliver next-generation aircraft by 2035. On 5 July, the Prime
Minister reaffirmed the UK's commitment to promoting co-operation
and collaboration between the UK and Italy, with Italy's Prime
Minister Giorgia Meloni, and on 6 July between the UK and Japan,
with Japan's Prime Minister Kishida. It was agreed that the
security of the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific are indivisible.
His Majesty's Government are committed to ensuring the security
of the Indo-Pacific, working closely with our allies.
For the UK, this aircraft will sit at the heart of a wider
system, networked and collaborating with a range of aircraft,
including the F35, and broader military capabilities. It will use
information systems, weapons and uncrewed collaborative combat
air platforms to complete the capability. Replacing the
capability provided by Typhoon, this system will sustain the UK's
operational advantage. In addition, GCAP will attract investment
into research and development in digital design and advanced
manufacture processes, providing opportunities for our next
generation of highly skilled engineers and technicians.
The signing of the convention on the establishment of the GCAP
International Government Organisation, known commonly as GIGO, by
the parties of the United Kingdom, Japan and Italy took place in
December 2023 and was conducted by the respective defence
secretaries of the three nations. The GIGO will function as the
executive body, with the legal capacity to place contracts with
industrial partners engaged in the GCAP. Through the GIGO, the UK
will lead on the development of an innovative stealth fighter jet
with supersonic capability and equipped with cutting-edge
technology, to facilitate collaboration with key international
partners that will raise the profile of the UK's combat air
industrial capacity.
The GIGO headquarters will be based in the UK, employing
personnel from the UK, Italy and Japan. The chief executive and
director posts shall be filled by nationals of different parties,
according to a mechanism that shall preserve a balance between
the parties. Given the nature of the GIGO as an international
defence organisation, the Ministry of Defence, with support from
the FCDO, has been leading on trilateral engagement and
negotiations on its establishment.
The convention, once in effect, will enable closer collaboration
between the parties—being the Governments of Japan, Italy and the
UK—and support the development of His Majesty's Government's
defence capabilities, stimulated by development of the UK-based
headquarters. It will enable further collaboration with key
industry partners, with the headquarters supporting hundreds of
jobs, working in close partnership with Rolls-Royce, Leonardo UK
and MBDA UK, and with hundreds of other companies from across the
UK in the supply chain to deliver the GCAP.
This Order in Council is a statutory instrument and forms part of
the secondary legislation needed to confer legal capacity and
privileges and immunities on the GCAP International Government
Organisation. It accords certain privileges and immunities to the
organisation's personnel and the representatives of the parties
to the convention. This order was laid in draft before Parliament
on 23 May 2024, is subject to the affirmative procedure and will
be made by the Privy Council once it is approved by both Houses.
Subject to the approval and ratification, the treaty would enter
into force on the deposit of the last instrument of ratification,
or acceptance of the parties. This is anticipated to be autumn
2024, to meet the 2035 in-service date.
This order confers a bespoke set of privileges and immunities, to
enable the GIGO to operate effectively in the UK. The Government
consider these privileges and immunities both necessary and
appropriate to deliver on the interests and commitments that the
UK has towards the organisation. They are within the scope of the
International Organisations Act and in line with UK precedents.
The privileges and immunities conferred on agency personnel and
representatives are not for their personal advantage but are in
order to ensure complete independence in the exercise of their
functions in connection with the GCAP. To be clear, agency
personnel have no personal immunity if they commit a crime, and
there is a clear carve-out ensuring that they have no immunity in
any vehicle incident. These immunities in respect of the GIGO
cover immunity from suit and legal process, inviolability of
premises and archives, and appropriate tax exemptions and reliefs
in relation to its official activities.
In respect of representatives of the parties and staff, the
provisions cover functional immunity and an immunity waiver.
Additionally, the order includes an exemption from the legal suit
and process immunity in the case of a motor traffic offence or
damage caused by a motor vehicle. This is a standard clause
included in statutory instruments and treaties, providing for
privileges and immunities.
To conclude, the support for the GIGO's establishment ensured
through this order is a unique opportunity to showcase UK
leadership and innovation in the combat air industry on a global
stage. Through the GIGO, the UK will collaborate with its
international partners on the development of an innovative
stealth fighter jet and facilitate collaboration with key
international partners that will raise the profile of the UK's
combat air industry. The security of the United Kingdom will
always be of paramount importance to this Government. Defence is
central to both UK security and our economic prosperity and
growth, including by harnessing the strength of our
well-established defence industries. This GIGO is key to GCAP,
and the UK continues to make positive progress with our partners
Japan and Italy. I beg to move.
(Con)
My Lords, I declare an interest as in the register. Behind this
necessary and detailed order lies an enormous project, one of the
biggest ever, which we are to undertake with Japan and Italy. We
are talking about billions of pounds involved. This is only a
small part of it but the importance of the bigger picture is
colossal. Behind that lies a weaving together of the most
advanced parts of Japanese and British industry in a way that I
find immensely encouraging and that we have been working towards
for years. We reached a peak of co-operation at the end of the
last century, but it rather fell away in the first 10 or 15 years
of this one. Now, the scene is much revived, and there are
enormous gains for Japan and ourselves. Japan is our best friend
in Asia, as they used to say; and I do think Japan still sees us
as its best friend in Europe. There are enormous opportunities
for prosperity in this country.
All I am asking of the Minister, who introduced this very clearly
indeed, is that if there are any bumps along the road, any
postponements or any difficulties arising out of interpretation
of this order, please could they be handled with the utmost
consideration of that wider picture, the sensitivities on both
sides and the fact that an enormous amount is at stake? No
aircraft will fly for 11 years. It is a long way ahead, and we
have many challenges to pass through, and world conditions will
probably change enormously by the time we get there. I am sure
what I am saying is obvious to the Minister and her government
colleagues and I ask to be forgiven for reiterating it. There is
a great deal at stake.
Lord (CB)
My Lords, I very much welcome this new arrangement. It is very
encouraging that this was started under one Government and is
being continued by another. I hope that will be a good example of
further co-operation between the Government and His Majesty's
Loyal Opposition. The doubts that were expressed about this
programme at one stage appear to have been pushed aside.
Certainly, it is important, in an international agreement such as
this, that we do not renege. I hope that when the noble Lord,
, comes to make his report,
he will bear in mind the overriding importance of this, not only
internationally but militarily.
(Con)
My Lords, I shall speak relatively briefly—I hope—to this order.
I declare an interest as chair of the UK-Japan 21st Century
Group. My noble friend who spoke a moment ago was chair of that
group previously. It gives us, I believe, an important
perspective on the remarkable strengthening of the UK-Japan
relationship over this last decade, which we should certainly
treasure. As I have this opportunity, I join in welcoming the
noble Baroness to the Government Front Bench and wishing her very
well.
5.00pm
I do not want to talk about the capability of the GCAP or
Tempest—not least coming after the noble and gallant Lord—as I
think we are all agreed about its vital importance as a bridge to
the kind of defence and security challenges we may face in the
middle of this century, or from 2035 if the in-service date is
2035. However, we can already see, not least in the context of
the Russia-Ukraine conflict, just how important it is to have air
superiority and to be able to control, as Tempest will, the many
unmanned aerial vehicles and the scope and range of the
responsibilities that pilots of Tempest will have in the future,
and how impossible it would be to engage in any conflict
successfully without that kind of air superiority which Tempest
can provide.
In relation to this order, as the noble Baroness quite rightly
said in her introduction, it is clearly necessary for the
implementation of the convention, and I think we are very much
looking forward to having GIGO in the UK as the headquarters and
to supporting from that headquarters the industrial partnership
that is already demonstrating its economic importance in this
country. I just want to focus on the relationship of this order
to the convention. The order is necessary for its implementation.
We are, as I understand it, the first of the three partners to
undertake an order of this kind, and we are looking forward to
ratification in the autumn.
I remind the House that, on 9 April, the International Agreements
Committee published its eighth report, which was on the GIGO
convention. Without quoting it at length, paragraph 50 in
particular made a recommendation relating to the extent of the
privileges and immunities and its interaction with the
headquarters of GIGO in this country. My point is not really to
discuss that but to say, as a former member of the International
Agreements Committee, that we secured the “Grimstone rule”, which
says that if a committee of this House—in this case,
appropriately, the International Agreements Committee—makes a
report drawing an international agreement, such as this
convention, to the special attention of the House, the agreement
should be given time for a debate in this House prior to
ratification. The FCDO is clearly the responsible department in
relation to international agreements, so I simply ask the noble
Baroness whether she will restate the Government's commitment to
respond to that report and to arrange time for a debate in this
House on the convention prior to ratification.
Finally, there was a good, useful and interesting debate in the
other place on 24 July. I share with my good and honourable
friend Dr , who was a former Defence Minister, the
statement he made at col. 694:
“No Government in their right mind would cancel this
project[”.—[Official Report, Commons, 29/7/24; col.
694.]](/search/column?VolumeNumber=&ColumnNumber=694&House=1&ExternalId=232AA281-DB57-4872-AEDB-59C5838D4B6C)
I do not think that is really the issue. The issue is that our
Japanese colleagues would very reasonably understand that a new
Government must assess the strategic defence environment with
which they are faced and the priorities that they must attach in
their strategic defence review. I think they would wish, where
there are clearly leading defence priorities, of which I think it
is widely held this is one, that that is made clear by the
Government at the earliest possible stage, and in particular that
nothing is done as a consequence of the SDR that would imperil
the timetable—clearly, the Government are getting on with this
order—of the implementation of the convention and its
ratification and, of course, most importantly, the development of
the programme and the in-service date of 2035. If they can see
that the British Government are not prejudicing any of the
operational and implementation aspects of the convention or the
GCAP project, I think they will completely understand the
importance of this Government having a modicum of time in which
to assess their own defence priorities.
However, subject to that, I hope that the House will approve the
order and we can see the GIGO established in this country as soon
as possible.
(Con)
My Lords, I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Chapman of
Darlington, on her appointment, and I thank her for introducing
this statutory instrument. I must declare my interest as a
consultant to Japan Bank for International Cooperation and as an
adviser to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.
The noble Baroness the Leader of the House was right to ask your
Lordships to dispense with Standing Order 73 to allow the
statutory instrument to be approved, notwithstanding that the
Joint Committee has not been able to consider it and has not laid
a report before your Lordships, as it is normally obliged to
do.
As the Minister explained, the SI before us supports the
implementation of an international treaty, namely the convention
between the Governments of Italy, Japan and the UK, signed in
December 2023, establishing the GIGO—I think our Italian friends
pronounce it “JIGO”, but I will follow the example of the noble
Baroness. She said that the treaty had been signed before the
election but could not be implemented because of the Dissolution.
I am not quite clear why this was not done before the
Dissolution, but I am happy that the Government recognise the
importance of taking action to avoid delays to the timelines that
we have agreed with our Japanese and Italian partners.
Most of our Japanese friends who are involved with the project
had wanted it to be a bilateral project between Japan and the
United Kingdom and initially resisted our proposal that it should
be a trilateral project including Italy. They thought that a
bilateral project with only two partners would be less at risk of
delays than a trilateral or multilateral project, whoever the
partners are. The need of the Japan Air Self-Defense Force for
the GCAP to be delivered on time is even more pressing than our
own, because its F2 aircraft must be replaced by 2035, whereas
the RAF Typhoons may be capable of extending their working lives
to some extent. I welcome the fact that the Government have taken
account of the need to provide assurance to the Government of
Japan that they are determined to avoid a delay such as is now
feared. Can the Minister tell the House when the announcement on
the location of the GIGO will be made? We know that it will be in
the UK, but the announcement as to where it will be located has
already been delayed well beyond what was expected.
Speaking at Farnborough, the Prime Minister said that GCAP was
important and was making “significant progress”, but he stopped
short of saying that Britain's participation in it would
continue. The Secretary of State for Business has been more
explicit in his support and has been quoted as saying that the
Government were “very strongly committed” to the programme. The
noble Lord, , has also tried to be as
reassuring as possible without saying that the noble Lord, , would have his hands tied
on this point. I do not expect the Minister to be able to give
any stronger reassurance today, but I welcome the Government's
decision to bring forward this statutory instrument for
approval.
As the Minister explained, the statutory instrument gives effect
to the treaty and confers legal capacity on the GIGO. It also
grants the normal diplomatic privileges and immunities which are
extended to diplomats. I am sure that Japan and Italy will
provide similar immunities and privileges to British employees
dispatched to work for the GIGO in those countries. Can the
Minister tell the House when she expects the GIGO to appoint the
chairman and members of the steering committee? What process will
be used to select directors of the GCAP agency and by when does
she expect they will be appointed?
I was happy to hear the Minister use the term Indo-Pacific in her
introduction, because I have not heard that term used often by
noble Lords on her Benches until now. Can she confirm that I
would be wrong to suggest that the Government are just a little
sceptical about the tilt to the Indo-Pacific? I hope she will say
that I am wrong. I welcome the Government's proposal to give this
instrument a fair wind and support the Motion to approve it.
(Lab)
I had not intended to intervene, but I have been very interested
to listen to other noble Lords talk about this issue. It is a
pity, on something of such profound importance, on which, as many
Members have said, billions of pounds are at stake, that we have
not had any opportunity for our committees to come forward to
this House and tell us the level of commitment that is being
made. Is it a commitment that we are bound by until the
completion of the project, or are there ways in which the concept
can be changed?
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that this is an
immensely important step forward in industrial partnership
between Japan and the United Kingdom. That is very important. We
all know what huge benefit we gained from the revival of our car
industry from the 1980s onwards as a result of Japanese
commitment to the UK. This is an opportunity for another wave of
that partnership.
However, I was on the European Affairs Committee of this House
for a long time, and I am conscious that our chairman, the noble
Lord, , was always warning us about
the dangers of British overcommitment on defence questions—an
overcommitment that we would be unable to fulfil. My noble friend
will remember this: one of
the key things that the Wilson Governments got right in the 1960s
was the decision, in 1968, to withdraw east of Suez, because it
put our defence policy on an affordable and deliverable basis
when Britain was no longer in a position to do that.
There are issues here. The most important defence priority of the
moment is not an aircraft in 15 years' time, it is getting
troops, which we do not have, on the ground in the Baltic states
on the borders with Russia to deter any potential Russian
aggression as a result of the Ukraine war. That is the biggest
priority and the biggest need in the defence budget. We have to
be wary about these very long-term, hugely expensive
commitments.
Is it possible for other nations to join this partnership? That
might help reduce some of the enormous costs of this programme. I
know that the French and Germans have their own ideas about
having a programme, but a lot of people think that it is
ludicrous for Europe to try to develop two of these advanced
aeroplanes on the Tempest model, and that Europe might decide
that it wants to come in. There has been speculation in the press
that Germany, as a result of budgetary pressures, is worried
about its commitment to this future fighter with France. Would it
be possible for the Germans to come in? There has been talk about
Saudi Arabia joining. How would this work? Is the legal framework
flexible enough to allow these welcome developments?
I emphasise that I am not against this order, but there are big
long-term questions. I am slightly surprised that we are doing
it—perhaps for good reasons, for all I know—before we have the
results of the review of Britain's defence commitments from the
noble Lord, . I look forward to that
because I cannot think of anyone better to lead it.
5.15pm
(Con)
My Lords, as the House knows, I had the privilege of being an RAF
jet pilot. This programme is absolutely fundamental to air power,
which, ultimately, in the modern world, is almost more
important—some would say more important—than feet on the
ground.
I will not repeat what my colleagues have said but will just say,
“Well done”. It has been only two sitting days since we discussed
defence issues. I took part in that really good debate, when it
was made clear across the House that this particular project is
fundamental to the future defence of our nation. I thank the
noble Baroness on the Front Bench—and welcome her to that
role—for moving with speed. I had the privilege of being a Deputy
Speaker down the other end, so am willing to help with the
proceedings on this important project.
I have worked with the Japanese in the past and believe that they
are very efficient. That is a blessing in itself and I would not
extend this programme beyond the three parties involved. I wish
the Government all possible speed. We know that our friend, the
noble Lord, , is very much behind this as
well.
of Newnham (LD)
My Lords, I have an advantage—or disadvantage—on these Benches
because, as often with debates on defence, there is nobody behind
me on the Back Benches to say anything different from what I may
be or had been planning to say.
As other noble Lords have, I welcome the noble Baroness, Lady
Chapman, to her place. I am speaking as the defence spokesperson
for the Liberal Democrats, even though this SI is being brought
forward via the FCDO, precisely because we felt that this is a
critical defence issue. Obviously, the interplay of defence and
foreign policy is vital.
I listened to much of the debate in the other place about the
GCAP arrangements. I think that GCAP has the huge advantage that
we can probably all pronounce it, as opposed to GIGO and its
alternative pronunciations. I will focus on GCAP.
I had the huge benefit of listening to the passion right across
the other place for this commitment to the trilateral
relationship with Japan and Italy. Much of the discussion here
has been about the relationship with Japan, which is clearly very
important to the Japanese. Over the last couple of years, the
Japanese embassy has been regularly coming to Liberal Democrat
conferences. Before other embassies remembered that we existed,
the Japanese ambassador and his colleagues were coming to talk to
us. The bilateral relationship with Japan and the relationship on
this specifically are hugely important. Last week, the noble
Lord, , was keen to reiterate the
commitment of His Majesty's Government to GCAP, which was very
reassuring to your Lordships' House.
Today, we are obviously supposed to be focusing on the statutory
instrument. I have a couple of very specific questions I want to
raise. I note that there is no impact assessment, and the reason
given for that is that no impact, or no significant impact, is
foreseen on the private, voluntary or public sectors in the UK. I
wonder why not. What would count as significant? Surely one of
the benefits of the Tempest programme is precisely that it is
intended to have a significant impact on our defence capability.
Presumably, this is simply the language of a statutory
instrument.
In particular, it was noted that there would not be a significant
impact on small businesses or micro-businesses. I raised this in
the humble Address debate last week, with the noble Lord, . The question was about the
role of small and medium-sized enterprises. Clearly, if this is
about defence investment and defence research and development,
there is a potentially significant role for small, medium and
even micro-businesses in the United Kingdom. What do His
Majesty's Government think are the possibilities for those small
businesses and micro-businesses?
I declare an interest—not, unlike other noble Lords, an
Anglo-Japanese interest—as I am a trustee of the Armed Forces
Parliamentary Trust, which organises the Armed Forces
Parliamentary Scheme. It is essentially funded by the defence
industries and, given that some of the primes were mentioned by
the Minister, I thought I should reflect that as a declaration of
interest, although I do not benefit personally.
In addition to wanting a better understanding of the impact on
our defence industrial base, I also want to ask a few questions
related to those from the noble Lord, , on the Labour Back Benches.
This is not because I disagree in any way with the proposals
here, but in order to get a little more information. Whether
somebody was trying to tease the United Kingdom Government in
drafting this convention, I am not sure. If we ever wanted to
rejoin the European Union, we would be doing so under Article 49.
It would appear that, if any country is looking to sign up to
this convention, it is under Article 49. There are some
provisions under Article 48 and 49 looking at the possibility of
expansion. What is His Majesty's Government's thinking about the
possibility of expansion? The wording seems to be slightly vague
at the moment. It is down to the steering committee of the GIGO
to decide whether other countries can discuss possible
membership. If a third-party country decided it wished to join,
would that have to come to the United Kingdom Parliament to be
ratified, or is it down to the steering committee, which would
not appear to be right? A greater understanding about that would
be welcome.
Similarly, under Article 50, about defence exports, what are the
mechanisms likely to be if one of the current parties has an arms
export ban to a certain country? How is that going to work in
terms of dealing with the GCAP?
Finally, there does not appear to be any provision for regular
reporting, other than back to the MoD and the FCDO. Will there be
a way for Parliament to be updated on these arrangements? These
are very much by way of probing questions and not in any way
speaking against the statutory instrument and the convention,
which are most welcome.
(Con)
My Lords, I begin by saying that we fully support the measures
before us. As the Minister said in her introductory remarks, it
is necessary to deliver the appropriate instrument into law, but
it is also about ensuring that UK military capability in the
crucial area of air combat is ready. We do so with two great
partners, Italy and Japan. Of course, we should not forget that
Japan has challenges in its part of the world that many other
countries do not face, not least the challenge posed by
Russia.
Since the trilateral in September 2023, this project has already
achieved significant goals, not least the signing of the
international treaty last December that we are legislating for
today. This is welcome.
The treaty establishes the legal basis for GIGO—and we need that
abbreviation, otherwise we would be repeating “GCAP International
Government Organisation” several times, which would extend any
debate. The fact that the international headquarters of GIGO will
be in the UK is in keeping with the spirit of equal partnership
and underpins the importance of GCAP. The first chief executives
of the GCAP agency and joint venture are from Italy and
Japan—again, that underlines the important collaboration.
As such, the SI before us enables this international treaty to
enter into effect, with important measures, as was said in the
introduction, on immunity and privileges that are necessary for
the effective operation of the GIGO. This SI is necessary to
deliver GCAP's governance arrangements, but in itself will not
deliver a single aircraft. Therefore, it is important that we
back GCAP to the hilt; the GCAP programme needs to be
wholeheartedly supported, with the appropriate funding necessary
to deliver our sixth-generation fighter capability.
As Parliament approves this SI, we welcome the remarks of the
Minister, and those of the noble Lord, , recently as well, about the
Government's support for GCAP. There has been a lot of
speculation and it is important that that speculation is put to
rest with wholehearted backing for GCAP. That was consistent
across both the new Government and the previous Government during
the election. I am sure the Minister will agree that clarity from
government is important for Parliament, industry and our
international partners. As we approach this SI, it is important
that our commitment to GCAP is clear.
I assure the Minister that from these Benches His Majesty's
Official Opposition are clear that we support the SI on the basis
that we are supporting GCAP as a whole, including by putting in
place the funding necessary to deliver its requirements over the
urgent timescale that all three member nations require. That is
the key point for all three nations; GCAP is all about pace and
timetable. For the United Kingdom and Italy, that means replacing
the Typhoon before it is withdrawn from service towards 2040. For
Japan, with equal urgency, it means replacing the Mitsubishi F2.
That is why any delay or deferment, whether caused by the lack of
a clear timetable or otherwise, is so critical.
Reflecting on the points made by my noble friends Lord Howell,
and Lord Trenchard, in 2020
PricewaterhouseCoopers estimated that the Tempest programme alone
would support an average of 20,000 jobs every year from 2026
until 2050. The noble Baroness, Lady , also raised an important point about small businesses
within the issue of jobs and the economic growth of the United
Kingdom. These are well-paid jobs in every constituency up and
down the country. Therefore, any notion of holding back on GCAP
expenditure would hit our economy hard. Any sense of delaying or
deferring GCAP expenditure would undermine our brilliant
aerospace industry, and indeed cast doubt over the vast sums of
private investment that are already waiting in the wings, from
which hundreds of UK SMEs stand to benefit.
We all recognise that GCAP is important to our economy, our
future war-fighting capability and our relations with our closest
international partners; the Minister recognised that in her
introduction. Therefore, we need to ensure that the Government
embrace GCAP wholeheartedly and confirm, as I have before, their
strong and steadfast support. That includes a clear timetable on
2.5%, so that we can ensure that this programme can be
accelerated by investing not only in the core platform but in the
associated technology of autonomous collaboration and a
digital-system approach, enabling the mass and rapid absorption
of battle space data.
As my noble friend alluded to, it is important
that we invest. People often talk of the next war, and I am sure
the Minister agrees with me that the best way to win a war is to
avoid it in the first place. That requires investment, and that
is what GCAP is all about. Part of our overall deterrence posture
is to signal to our adversaries that we stand with our allies and
friends, and our preparedness to always be ready to out-compete
their technology.
I conclude by saying that His Majesty's Official Opposition fully
support this statutory instrument and GCAP, and the powerful
gains that it will give to the United Kingdom's economic and
military strength, along with our key partners, Italy and
Japan.
5.30pm
of Darlington (Lab)
My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords who have contributed to
this afternoon's discussion, and will address some of the
important questions raised. I am grateful to have the support of
the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, and to hear his trenchant support for
GCAP. That is noted, and I am sure it will also be noted by my
noble friend as he conducts his strategic
defence review.
I know that the House has a keen interest in the UK's work as
part of GCAP. Together with our partners Japan and Italy we are
working to deliver a next-generation combat aircraft with
advanced survivability, sensors, weapons and data systems. As
well as cutting-edge military technology, the programme is
delivering significant economic benefits, with more than 3,500
people already working on GCAP across the UK.
The point made by the noble Baroness, Lady , about investment and opportunities for jobs, and in
particular small businesses, was important and well made. I
reassure her that there currently are over 600 organisations and
academic institutions involved, including small businesses. I
thank her for making that point.
I am not an MoD Minister, and my noble friend would be unhappy with me if I
started to give too many of my own opinions on defence issues. We
are looking today at the privileges and immunities that will
enable us to continue with the GIGO establishment. In doing so we
will be able to better support GCAP's programme aims and
fulfilment of the Government's objectives. We will also be better
placed to work with international partners and influence the
combat air industry as a result.
The noble Lord, Lord Howell, urged us to handle this programme
with sensitivity. He gave wise counsel and his speech was well
received. I will keep his wise words in mind.
Just as my noble friend will hear the support given
to GCAP by the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, I am equally sure that he
will hear the argument made by the noble and gallant Lord, Lord
, and the words of support
he shared with us.
I am aware of the point made by the noble Lord, , about the International
Agreements Committee. I will discuss this with our business
managers. Obviously, there will be no desire to delay anything
any further than necessary. He makes the exact point that I would
have made, sitting where he is, but we want to make sure that we
can proceed in a timely manner. There will be opportunities to
scrutinise this, as noble Lords would expect. I also take the
noble Lord's point about the strategic defence review, and ask
him to note that we have brought this here today in a timely
way.
The noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, asked an important question
about where the location will be and when that announcement will
be made—the answer is in due course. I am told that there are
commercial sensitivities around this, which I am sure he will
appreciate, but I am heartened to know that there would be
considerable pride taken in hosting this organisation, wherever
it ends up being established.
As a Government, we of course welcome the opportunity to work
with the Indo-Pacific region. No reluctance should be interpreted
in any way about the Government's enthusiasm for working with
Indo-Pacific nations. I speak as the new Minister for Latin
America, so I am very keen that we take this approach.
My heart always sinks a little when I am challenged by my noble
friend . We do not enter these
arrangements lightly. There are clear benefits for both defence
capability and jobs and skills. My noble friend made a strong
case for this strategic defence review. He is very well placed to
make sure that his view is known to his noble friend .
I am also grateful to the noble Lord, , for his offer of support and
assistance. His experience in this and in the other place will be
invaluable.
The issue of further partners was raised by my noble friend
and the noble Baroness, Lady
. All three GCAP partners have highlighted our openness
to working with other nations through this programme while
supporting the objective of the core partners, delivering a
successful programme and keeping us on course for a 2035
in-service date. Any decisions on wider partnering will be made
together by the core partners.
The noble Baroness, Lady , introduced her question by talking about membership of
the EU and whether we might wish to rejoin. I am not sure if that
is her party's position currently—I may have missed it—but it is
not currently the Government's position.
of Newnham (LD)
To clarify, I was merely speculating about where a country might
wish to join—or rejoin under Article 49. I was not suggesting
that noble Lords on any Benches are necessarily pushing for it at
this stage.
of Darlington (Lab)
I am sure that the whole House is grateful to the noble Baroness
for that clarification.
Motion agreed.
|