HC Deb 02 February 1954 vol 523 cc198-202
46. Mr. Wyatt

asked the Prime Minister whether the statement made on Wednesday, 27th January in London by the Minister of Defence regarding the building up of a mobile strategic reserve in the United Kingdom ready to go off to deal with any emergency at any time represents Government policy.

48 Mr. Bellenger

asked the Prime Minister what is to be the composition and size of the mobile strategic reserve to be concentrated in the United Kingdom.

49 Mr. Wigg

asked the Prime Minister why the statement about future defence policy has not been announced by him to the House of Commons instead of being revealed by the Minister of Defence to a meeting in a private club.

50 Mr. A. Henderson

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the new re-armament plan of Her Majesty's Government.

The Prime Minister

My noble Friend's speech was simply a re-statement of what is well known. Shortly after assuming office, I myself expressed concern at the absence of regular formations in this country, and re-creation of a strategic reserve has always been one of our declared objectives. The Government's policy on defence will, of course, be stated in the annual White Paper which, I hope, will be ready on the 18th of this month.

Mr. Wyatt

Can the Prime Minister say where this strategic reserve is to come from, because our only reserve is at present locked up in the Canal Zone and his own back benchers will not let him sign the agreement with Egypt which would let it out?

The Prime Minister

We have frequently spoken about a re-deployment of our forces in the Canal Zone which are at the present moment a very heavy drain upon our resources—[Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] Certainly. And if proper and decent arrangements can be made, that undoubtedly will be one of the sources which will enable us to carry out our policy of forming a mobile strategic reserve.

Mr. Bellenger

Is the House therefore to understand that it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government at an early date to form this strategic mobile reserve in this country; and if that is the fact, why was not Parliament told of this and given some opportunity of eliciting details, rather than that the Minister of Defence should make this important statement—for such it is—in a Conservative political club?

The Prime Minister

There is nothing new about this statement, nothing new at all. It has been well before the House and ought to have been well in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman for a good many months and even years—even two years past. But I am quite clear that the speech which the noble Lord, Lord Alexander, made was a perfectly right and proper one for him to make. It contained, as I say, no new, novel announcement at all, but was a very necessary re-statement of important facts in a coherent form. It is usual when Parliament is sitting, of course, to take advantage of the opportunity of making statements, new statements of policy, to them. But even that is not a rule. Many precedents to the contrary could be quoted.

Mr. Henderson

Does the Prime Minister's answer therefore express the view that the Minister of Defence was incorrectly reported in view of the statement in "The Times" to the effect that after many months of careful thought and study he—that is the Minister of Defence—and his colleagues in the Cabinet had formulated a plan for re-armament? Or is it merely another case of the mountain in labour producing a mouse? Or was he referring to the £4,700 million plan as modified in the light of changed economic circumstances?

The Prime Minister

I think that is too much mixed up with mice and all that sort of thing.

Mr. Henderson

Will the Prime Minister please do me the honour of replying to the first part of my supplementary question. Is it his case that, in view of what I have quoted from "The Times" report, the Minister of Defence was misreported?

The Prime Minister

I have not compared the report in "The Times" with any statement on the subject made to me by my noble Friend. But I have given a full answer to the effect that this was not a statement about which complaint should justly be made that it was not made in the first instance to the House.

Mr. Wigg

While agreeing that Lord Alexander said nothing new, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman would agree that it is quite clear the Minister of Defence went out of his way to give the impression that it was a very important statement; that he stressed that for many months the Government had been engaged in a review of the defence situation and that these were Government proposals? We did not expect anything new or novel.

Mr. Shinwell

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if all these answers he has given to the various questions on this subject mean that there are to be no modifications in the Government's defence policy?

The Prime Minister

The White Paper is to be put out on 18th February, that is barely a fortnight from now, and I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman, for all his zeal, can restrain himself till then.

Mr. Shinwell

That simply will not do. I have asked the right hon. Gentleman a perfectly fair and simple question. I have asked him whether his answers mean—in spite of the speech of the Minister of Defence at the Constitutional Club—that the Government do not contemplate any modifications in their defence policy?

Hon Members

Wait and see.

The Prime Minister

I think it would be a great pity to destroy the right hon. Gentleman's pleasurable anticipation of the occasion.

Mr. Gough

In the formation of a strategic reserve, would my right hon. Friend bear in mind the supreme importance of truly airborne troops?

Sir H. Williams

On a point of order. Would it be proper to refer to the Monopolies Commission the behaviour of Privy Councillors on the other side of the House who want to monopolise the whole of Question time?

Mr. Fernyhough

In view of the fact that in the next 12 months the American Government is to reduce its armed forces by 300,000, does not the Prime Minister think the statement by the Minister of Defence, that there is no opportunity of reducing the period of conscription in this country, unfair to the British lads?

The Prime Minister

No, Sir. We regard it as an honour to do our duty in the world field, and each country has to judge its own necessities and commitments for itself. But, in any case, the hon. Member will have the chance of dealing with this and of putting his views on this matter when the discussion on the Army Estimates and the White Paper takes place.