§ 51. Lieut.-Colonel Liptonasked the Secretary of State for War why Banbury has been declared out-of-bounds to British troops stationed nearby; and whether he will lift the ban.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for War (Mr. Fitzroy Maclean)I regret to say that certain troops were involved in discreditable incidents at Banbury. In the circumstances, the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Western Command, decided that the town should be placed out-of-bounds for men of the units concerned. He will review the position as necessary and my right hon. Friend does not propose to intervene.
§ Lieut.-Colonel LiptonIs it not a scandal that because of one or two unfortunate incidents a large number of British troops should be denied access to the town of Banbury, whereas American troops are allowed there? Could it not be left to the local police, assisted by British and American military police, if necessary, to maintain law and order, instead of having this indefensible and inexcusable ban?
§ Mr. MacleanNo, Sir. This measure was taken after consultation with the civil police, and it is considered advisable for the purpose of preventing further incidents. As I have said, my right hon. Friend has every confidence in the judgment of the Commander-in-Chief and he will review the position as and when advised.
§ Mr, ShinwellBut is it not true that, since the ban was imposed, the American troops have themselves voluntarily refused to take advantage of facilities in Banbury and have kept away? Is not the situation farcical? Why is this ban imposed simply because a number of men in a unit have had a fracas with men associated with the American Forces? Is it not a good thing that occasionally they should let themselves go?
§ Mr. MacleanThe discipline of the American forces is a matter for the American military authorities. It has nothing to do with us.
§ Mr. IsaacsCan the Minister say if this made Banbury Cross?