North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Hansard, 17 November 1954)

§ 41. Mr. H. Hynd
asked the Minister of Defence if he will seek information from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation on the progress made in co-ordinating the length of national service in each of the member States.

§ Mr. H. Macmillan
I am fully informed of the consideration which is being given to this important question by N.A.T.O.

§ Mr. Hynd
If the Minister is fully informed on this, can he tell us how many of our allies in N.A.T.O. impose a period of national service of two years, as we do; and is not he troubled by the fact that this country appears to be bearing an undue share of responsibility in this respect?

§ Mr. Macmillan
A N.A.T.O. working group on manpower has now been set up parallel to the other working groups as part of the annual review process, and partly for the reason which the hon. Gentleman has in mind. I must point out that some N.A.T.O. countries have only internal responsibilities and that others, like ourselves, have considerable external commitments.

§ Mr. Bellenger
Would the right hon. Gentleman impart a little of this information to the House and perhaps circulate in HANSARD a tabulated statement showing the period of national service in the other member countries and any progress that may have been made to level off the period of service between all of them?

§ Mr. Macmillan
If the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question, I will do my best to answer it and to circulate such a tabulated statement.

§ Mr. Strachey
Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that now that we have minimised to a considerable extent these external commitments to which he referred, the time has come to consider a review of our own period of National Service? Would not it be very much better to do that in consultation with our allies in N.A.T.O., so that a reduced and uniform period of service is established?

§ Mr. Macmillan
That is exactly why the N.A.T.O. working group on manpower has been set up and is now at work.

§ Mr. Hynd
On a point of order. The Minister invited my right hon. Friend the Member for Bassetlaw (Mr. Bellenger) to put down a Question in order to elicit information. Are you aware, Mr. Speaker, that I have been trying to put down a Question along those lines for a considerable time without success.

§ Mr. Speaker
That is not a point of order.

§ Mr. Macmillan
I cannot do more than try to answer any Question which any hon. Member puts down.

§ 43. Mr. Emrys Hughes
asked the Minister of Defence if he will consider publication, as a White Paper, of a statement of Her Majesty's Government's policy relating to the future strategy of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

§ Mr. H. Macmillan
Any observations that Her Majesty's Government have to make on the future strategy of N.A.T.O. will be included in the periodic reviews of defence policy which are presented to Parliament.

§ Mr. Hughes
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since the last review of defence policy was published there have been two very important and alarming statements made by Field Marshal Montgomery? Can the right hon. Gentleman say how far these statements are identical with the policy of Her Majesty's Government? Is Field Marshal Montgomery speaking for the Government when he describes the possible use of the atom bomb in the next war?

§ Mr. Macmillan
I think that that question provides one of the reasons why it would be better to wait for the comprehensive statement which will soon be published.

§ 44. Mr. Emrys Hughes
asked the Minister of Defence what recent representations he has received from the High Command at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation about the need for co-ordinating the Civil Defence arrangements of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation countries.

§ Mr. H. Macmillan
A Civil Defence Committee has been set up under the N.A.T.O. Council to effect closer co-operation between the member Governments of N.A.T.O. in Civil Defence matters.

§ Mr. Hughes
Is the Minister aware that Field Marshal Montgomery has also said that Civil Defence in this country has been grossly neglected and, if so, who is responsible?

§ Mr. Macmillan
The Question refers not to this country but to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. I answered that a special committee for that purpose had been set up by the N.A.T.O. countries.

§ Mr. de Freitas
Is the Minister aware that Field Marshal Montgomery referred to all the N.A.T.O. countries and said that Civil Defence had been grossly neglected? Will he refer that statement to the Home Secretary?

§ Mr. Macmillan
Whatever was said, the Question does not refer to this country but to N.A.T.O.

§ 46. Mr. Wyatt
asked the Minister of Defence if he will recommend to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation the uniform equipment of forces under their control with a British fighter aircraft type, of which he has been informed, in view of the fact that its cost of £25,000 compares favourably with the £70,000 cost of other fighters available.

§ Mr. H. Macmillan
The relative merits of this design and of others put forward to meet a N.A.T.O. specification for a light ground attack aircraft are at present being considered by the competent N.A.T.O. authorities. I naturally hope that a British design will be regarded as the most suitable.

§ Mr. Wyatt
If, as is evident, the Minister of Defence is not interested in saving the British taxpayer's money by ordering a light aircraft of this type, will he not press on N.A.T.O. that it should order the aircraft because the N.A.T.O. countries cannot afford the very expensive aircraft that we have to buy?

Hon. Members
Answer.

§ Mr. Macmillan
I thought that in the form in which the question was asked, it did not call for any more than mere acknowledgment.