ORAC
Not quite. The present "military need" as defined by certain quarters would essentially justify lots of pongos and Hunters if you equate it purely to Herrick and Telic, plus the ability to intercept Achmed the Awful in an Airbus or Boeing in the UK ADIZ. If you think beyond a land-centric campaign in Asia (a combination we should never sign up to long-term), then the "military need" looks a bit different.
The difference between buying a carrier and Typhoon is that aircraft of broadly equivalent performance can generally be acquired within a couple of years (if off the shelf), whereas ships generally take four or five times longer, largely as there is no equivalent shelf.
Let us be perfectly clear - the carriers are at least as justifiable as Typhoon militarily. The difference is that the funding for Typhoon was committed much earlier (as was Sentinel and to a degree A400M), so what the "economic" argument boils down to is "we've got our toys", yours are unaffordable. Yet CVF offers things Typhoon can never do - the ability to influence events beyond 500 miles from the UK. If all we want to do is defend the UK, then Hunters (or at least Lightnings) would be just fine.