On 26 February, Sarah spoke in an opposition day debate in the House of Commons about the future of the Royal Navy.  She used her time to make a solid case for the future of Portsmouth Naval Base.  Below is a transcript.   

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I am conscious of the limited time available, so I shall concentrate on the naval base review, which has great significance for my constituency. Last year, Labour’s defence budget reached £30 billion for the first time ever. That is a vast amount of money, and if we are asking the British taxpayer for such a sum, it is important that we spend it wisely. More importantly, servicemen and women are risking their lives on operations, so it is vital that maximum resources should be spent on the front line.   That means that we cannot do things in the way that we have always done them; we have to change. Change brings uncertainty, not least in Portsmouth, and the uncertainty that has faced us since the naval base review has been overwhelming.

There are about10 options in the review, two of which have had the unfortunate effect of pitting one naval base against another. I should like to put on record that, in Portsmouth, we are making our case based on our own competences. I believe that there are strategic and financial cases for all three bases to stay open. Although I regret the uncertainty, the review has enabled us in Portsmouth to demonstrate how we are evolving to meet today’s and future naval requirements in a cost-effective way. The hon. Member for Gosport (Peter Viggers) has just spoken about the number of jobs that are dependent on the Portsmouth naval base area.  

Ten per cent. of the residents of Portsmouth are in what are known as defence-dependent jobs; 15 per cent. of the residents of the hon. Gentleman’s constituency are in such jobs, as are 8 per cent. of the residents of Fareham. The naval base generates an income of£680 million for the local economy, and a recent report by Portsmouth university estimated that if the base closed there would be a loss of £350 million in the sub-regional economy.

Although that is important, I would be the last person to say that we should make local economics the basis of our defence expenditure decisions. However, we must maintain our skills base in different geographical locations, in order properly to support our front-line forces and protect our national interest and national security.  That is why the defence industrial strategy that was published last year looked to industry to adopt a partnership approach with the Ministry of Defence rather than the traditional contractor-supplier approach. In Portsmouth, we have taken that into account and embraced it wholeheartedly. We have a unique partnership with industry in Portsmouth, principally with VT Shipbuilding and BAE Systems.

We provide a one-stop shop for shipbuilding and ship support—from design, build and launch through upgrade to eventual disposal—all on one site.  There are overwhelming financial and militarily strategic reasons for keeping Portsmouth naval base open. Our naval base is not just about berthing ships; there are myriad ancillary services in and around it. The cost of moving all those services alone would be prohibitive, but if we also take into account our industrial partnerships, the case for keeping Portsmouth open becomes overwhelming.

Our industrial base includes all the major players in the defence industry, and many of the other smaller suppliers in the defence sector. Having that huge range of naval, MOD and industrial organisations co-located in one place means that the MOD has all its key strategic capabilities together. Our unique culture of partnering and MOD-industry collaboration is already driving down costs within the Ministry: £50 million-worth of savings have already been delivered, and another £30 million have been identified. Last December, BAE Systems and VT Shipbuilding started discussions with a view to forming a single joint-venture company.

That would place all the UK’s industrial shipbuilding and support expertise in one organisation, which would result in the potential for substantial cost reductions for the MOD. Linked with that proposal is the establishment of Portsmouth as a centre of excellence. If the naval base were to close and the ships were to move away, the whole venture would be in jeopardy.

All the synergies that would be achieved by having a centre of excellence in one place would be fragmented, resulting in much higher costs to the taxpayer. My fear is that that could prevent us from giving the Navy the resources that it needs to be a global force in the future. The case for keeping Portsmouth naval base open is not only financial. There is also a militarily strategic case for doing so, not least because two studies have suggested that it is the only place to base-port the aircraft carriers.

We have made a significant investment—£40 million—on new jetties. The only other possible place for the aircraft carriers to go is Faslane, but it does not have the infrastructure to support them: its jetties are only 15 m long. So that investment would have to be duplicated in order to accommodate the carriers there.

There must also be a question mark over whether we would want to put all our major strategic naval assets in one place. I believe that we need all three naval bases as strategic assets in an uncertain world. We can all make substantial cost reductions while keeping all three bases open. This does not have to be a beauty contest between Devonport, Portsmouth and Faslane.

It would be pointless to prop up one naval base for economic reasons at the expense of destroying the local economy of another. We can all work together with our industrial partners to make all three bases cost effective and to deliver proper support to our ships in the front line. I regret the uncertainty that the review has caused to my constituents, and I hope that we shall have a speedy decision.

I am hopeful, however, that the outcome will be a strengthening of all three of our naval bases, delivering cost-effective and battle-effective support, and maximising the specialist capabilities of each base to enable a modern, flexible and efficient Royal Navy to fulfil its global role and reinforce Britain’s position as a force for good in an uncertain world.