I would like hon. Member, Shri. Indrajit Gupta, who offered this criticism to find out whether there is that healthy growth in this particular expenditure or not, whether we had reached a stage where we are not giving the additional amount that is required or whether they are growing. The growth will have to be very gradual; otherwise, it cannot be a growth, it will he something wrong. So, this expenditure is gradually growing. We are taking more and more projects and more and more important proposition for research work. Personally I have reason to believe and to he satisfied that there is that natural rate of growth in development and research work.
Maintenance of installations is Rs. 38 crores and capital works— new construction of airfields, dockyards, factories, depots etc., is about Rs. 93 crores. I am giving this general expenditure for the information of the House so that they can know what exactly is the composition of the expenditure of the Defence Budget; not merely on the manpower.
Really speaking, normally in most of the modern armies, if you see the modern armies of the more advanced countries, the expenditure on supplies is bigger. That is how they become more modernised and I find, in our own expenditure also, there is that trend, namely, that the expenditure on equipment and supplies is growing. This is a sign that the army is becoming a little more advanced, more modernised, more mechanised, more scientifically thought of and organised. That is one point that I am trying to make. My purpose in giving this analysis of the expenditure is to emphasize this one particular aspect of the problem.
Having said so much, I would like to go into some of the criticism that was offered. That is very welcome criticism because that provides me an opportunity to explain the Government’s point of view in this particular matter. One of the very constructive speeches I heard yesterday was from the hon. Members, Shri. Krishnapal Singh, and Shri. Indrajit Gupta, I remember to have replied to some of the points that they have made in my previous speeches also, but repetition is sometimes good for my purpose or possibly for those who have made this criticism.
The point made was that there should be a unified command. People think on these lines because they have heard that a unified command is introduced in the UK by the recent reforms that they have introduced in their administrative matters. May be, it is accepted by some other so-called advanced countries.
Our own experience shows— at least I can go by my own personal experience in this matter— that we have not yet reached in this country a stage when we can have the luxury of imitating some other country in this particular matter. In those countries all the three services are developed in a balanced manner. There is some sort of balanced development of all the three services—Army, Air Force and Navy—in those countries and perhaps it would he good to have one person selected from any service and to make him the Chief of the Defence Staff and leave the matter entirely to him.
