Closing RAF Marnham will be 'devastating' for the community

Elizabeth Truss MP writes for ePolitix.com ahead of her adjournment debate on the future of RAF Marham.

Sincethe announcement of the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR)there has been considerable debate about future basing location for theTornado aircraft.

The current eight Tornado squadrons that aresplit between RAF Marham and RAF Lossiemouth will be reduced to six andcentralised in a single location. With the Scottish elections takingplace next year I am concerned this debate will be increasinglydominated by high politics and celebrity endorsements.

I haveput forward this issue for an adjournment debate as I want to highlightthe economic and employment realities of the location of this criticalbase.

The investment in engineering facilities at RAF Marham hasbeen huge, estimated to cost £50m to relocate. This is not money easilyafforded during a public spending squeeze.

The militaryarguments for Marham are also strong, particularly given the currentAfghanistan conflict. Flights leaving Marham have no need to refuel ontheir way to our forward operating base in Cyprus. It is also welllocated to work with the nearby american bases at Lakenheath andMildenhall.

The economic and military case is clear. But thereis also the impact of removing bases and the impact on the localcommunity. No MP wants to see a source of jobs and pride removed fromtheir community. However, I believe RAF Marham closing in Norfolk wouldhave a more devastating effect than the alternative.

RAFMarham is a more deprived area with higher unemployment (7.4 per centin West Norfolk) than the alternative base Lossiemouth in Scotland (4.8per cent in Moray). This is repeated in several deprivation indicators.

To remove a key source of employment and training would bedisastrous for the local economy. There are more jobs to lose in Marham(5,170) than in Lossiemouth (2,631) and Kinloss (1,810) combined.

Bylistening to the politics rather than the economics of the issue thegovernment would be moving jobs from a strategically well placed basefor Afghanistan in an area of higher unemployment and deprivation to aless well placed base in an area of lower unemployment and deprivation.

This would not be the way forward, the Ministry of Defence andthe government should be influenced by the defence of the realm, therealities of the public purse and the real jobs and livelihoods ofthousands in West Norfolk.

Have your say...

Please enter your comments below.

Name

Your e-mail address

Listen to audio version

Please type in the letters or numbers shown above (case sensitive)