I do not think that that is within the scope of the study under consideration; the study is about how we might improve the existing programme's value for money and delivery. Again, I cannot pre-empt the decisions that the National Security Council will arrive at shortly, when it addresses the value-for-money report, but my hon. Friend's point is considerably wide of its scope.
The coalition agreement also said:"““Liberal Democrats will continue to make the case for alternatives,””"
and the Liberal Democrats will. I shall continue to argue that in government; my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for North East Fife (Sir Menzies Campbell) will continue to argue the case for alternatives outwith government. But, the Government are proceeding with the programme, and that is the point that I wish to make clear today. The arrangements that the right hon. Member for Coventry North East left in place are those which the value-for-money report is studying, and to the extent that any better value for money can be squeezed out of the programme, that is the objective of the exercise.
Strategic Defence and Security Review
Proceeding contribution from
Nick Harvey
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 September 2010.
It occurred during Backbench debate on Strategic Defence and Security Review.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
515 c1056 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 18:34:13 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_665378
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_665378
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_665378