HC Deb 25 October 1960 vol 627 cc2154-7
The Secretary of State for War (Mr. John Profumo)

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I wish to make a statement about the casualties in recent training exercises in B.A.O.R.

During the period from 1st August to 15th October, 1960, six soldiers lost their lives as a result of the training being carried out in B.A.O.R. Four of these deaths were due to traffic accidents, one to a vehicle fire, and the other to asphyxiation from fire-extinguisher fumes.

To be effective, Army training must be as realistic and comprehensive as possible. Naturally, there is no question of trying to achieve this end regardless of the danger to individuals. But the fact is that the whole of Rhine Army, plus certain units from this country, were engaged in intensive field training and exercises under active service conditions over this period of ten weeks. In such circumstances there must always be the danger of accidents, some of which may prove fatal.

Every case of accidental death outside the United Kingdom is the subject of a board of inquiry and the proceedings are sent to the War Office. Where there is any lesson to be drawn from the findings of the board, it is of course applied for the future; and where the proceedings reveal circumstances which call for disciplinary action, this is taken.

In view of the public concern about these accidents, I give the House the undertaking that I will myself look at the proceedings of each of the boards of inquiry.

I should be misleading the House if I said anything which could be interpreted as meaning that in training on this scale all danger of fatal accidents can be removed. It cannot. There will always be the possibility of human error and mechanical failure. These are the chief causes of fatal accidents.

Apart from the unfortunate deaths to which I have referred, during the whole of this ten-week period of mass manoeuvres there were only four cases of serious injury. These were all the result of traffic accidents. I am glad to say that two of the soldiers involved have already been discharged from hospital.

I think that the House would wish me to repeat the expression of sympathy which I have already made public with the relatives of those who have been killed.

Mr. Strachey

The information that the Secretary of State has given us modifies, to some extent, the impression which the public received of this lamentable incident. The right hon. Gentleman now tells us that there were only six deaths—not nine, as reported—and four injured, as against a report of 125 injured.

In view of this, will the right hon. Gentleman look very carefully into the statement of the spokesman for B.A.O.R., who is reported as saying, on 14th October, "Nine deaths were not considered to be excessive"? We now see that that statement was not only callous—I can use no other word—but also misinformed. Further, the spokesman completely failed to contradict the very widely spread statement that 125 men had been injured. In justice to itself, the Army's public relations need rather better handling than that.

Secondly, while I agree, of course, that manoeuvres must be realistic, were not these really rather too realistic? After all, the revised figure of fatal casualties is only two short of the total casualties incurred in the taking of Port Said in an opposed air drop and an opposed landing? We should like some explanation of this sudden rise in figures as otherwise we would think that the Secretary of State was being rather callous.

Mr. Profumo

I think that every hon. Member has considerable experience of the Press and will appreciate that when someone is asked, on the spur of the moment, to make a statement on a very controversial issue it is not always possible to make a statement which afterwards, on the facts of the case then known, can be taken out of its context. Perhaps I may say that when the Army spokesman made his statement about the numbers we did not know what the facts truly were. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why make it, then?"] It is only since then that it has been possible to ascertain that of the nine deaths about which the Army spokesman talked, three, whilst occurring within the period during which the exercise was being carried out, had absolutely nothing to do with the exercise itself, but were caused by traffic accidents outside the sphere of the exercise altogether.

Secondly, the figure of 125 represented casualties in the military sense; that is to say, that of about 50,000 troops engaged in the exercise during the period of ten weeks that number were sent to hospital, but some had colds, and others had chipped fingers; the number included all the things that in the normal way one would not call casualties. It is for that reason that those figures were given.

To put it into perspective, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman saw the action I took after this, when I issued a statement on behalf of the Army Council saying that the death of any soldier greatly disturbed me and my colleagues. I can only say that I have taken the earliest possible opportunity to put this matter in its proper perspective, and I hope that the House will accept that.

Mr. Shinwell

The Secretary of State mentioned 50,000 troops as being engaged in these manœuvres. Is it not true that the number was in excess of that figure? How does the number of casualties—accidents and fatalities—compare with what has happened in previous manœuvres? Is not one of the troubles that these exercises had a higher mobility than before; that previous manœuvres have been a bit sluggish and that present ones are being speeded up excessively? Will the right hon. Gentleman look into that aspect of the matter?

Mr. Profumo

I think that as we use more modern equipment the term "speeded up" is correct. The exercises become more modern and complicated. This year the training exercise went on for longer, and the number of troops involved was greater than for several years. The figure of 50,000 that I quoted is approximate. It is difficult to tell accurately, because some of the troops took part on several occasions. In addition to the British Army of the Rhine there were, as has been said, other units sent from this country to take part in the exercises.

While I do not at all seek to minimise what happened, I do say, to put it into perspective, that if, during the same period of August to October, one takes the number of people in civilian life killed on the roads, one finds that the figure is 789 compared with a figure of four.