§ 15. Mr. V. Yatesasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what advice he has given to police authorities regarding the use of mounted police in industrial disputes.
§ 16. Mr. J. Silvermanasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he has given to chief constables with regard to the use of mounted police at the scenes of industrial disputes in view of the possibility of unnecessary provocation being caused by their presence.
§ Mr. DeedesMy right hon. and gallant Friend has given no guidance to police authorities or chief constables on the use of mounted police in industrial disputes. It is for the chief officer of police concerned to take appropriate action to ensure that the law is complied with.
§ Mr. YatesWhile in no way wishing to cast any reflection on the police, is not the Joint Under-Secretary aware that the presence of mounted police in a dispute such as the one which occurred in the 1573 Midlands causes very ill feeling? Can he give an undertaking to try to give some guidance to chief constables that only in extreme cases should such measures be taken?
§ Mr. DeedesThis is not a question of provocation but of physical control. All hon. Members with experience of crowds and so on know that there are many jobs which mounted police can do more safely and more efficiently than a larger number of foot police. No doubt, that is why they were used on this occasion.
§ Mr. SilvermanIs the Joint Under-Secretary aware that the very presence of mounted police on occasions like these offers a provocation and creates in itself ill-will and bad temper? Is he aware, that, on the whole, where mounted police have not been employed, the behaviour in industrial disputes has been very good? If he has ever been present in a crowd, especially where tempers are likely to be lost when mounted police are present, he will appreciate how the men engaged in industrial disputes feel about it.
§ Mr. DeedesI cannot accept that mounted police will create more provocation than foot police. It is a question of safety, and there are many occasions on which, for the safety of all concerned, mounted police can do a better job than foot police.
§ Mr. UsborneDoes the Joint Under-Secretary not realise that there is a significant difference between controlling a crowd, say, coming out from a football match, when everybody is fairly reasonable, and the controlling of a crowd where there is an industrial dispute? That seems to be a very significant difference, and it appears that the Government have not understood that difference.
§ Mr. DeedesIt is the duty of the police to enforce the law and it is the responsibility of the chief officer of police to employ the methods which he thinks will help him to do that best.
§ Mr. YoungerEven if that be so, is there not a case for special instructions? Can the hon. Member give an assurance that it is normal police practice to employ not only the least force which is necessary, but also the least show of force 1574 and to leave the situation as normal as possible whenever there are crowds of any kind?
§ Mr. DeedesThat is obviously so. The responsibility in these matters ultimately rests, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, with the police authority and not with my right hon. and gallant Friend.
§ 19. Mr. Chapmanasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he has given to provincial police, by circular or otherwise, as to police intervention where peaceful picketing is employed as a result of an industrial dispute.
§ Mr. DeedesMy right hon. and gallant Friend drew the attention of chief constables last year to a circular on the provisions of the law relating to picketing which was addressed to chief constables in December, 1925, and later presented to Parliament as Command Paper No. 2666 of 1926.
§ Mr. ChapmanI am much obliged. Is the hon. Member aware that, although many of us pay tribute to the bearing and good humour of the police outside the B.M.C. factory, we were nevertheless upset by one or two of the incidents, and particularly, as my hon. Friend has said, about the use of mounted police when tempers are frayed and it seems to the men, at least, to be provocation when they are moved up suddenly? Would it be possible for the hon. Gentleman to send a further note, following his circular, drawing the attention of police authorities to this aspect of the matter?
§ Mr. DeedesI should stress that the circular to which I have referred contained no guidance on the methods to be adopted by the police to enforce the law. That is the responsibility of the police and, ultimately, of the police authority.