HC Deb 18 October 1961 vol 646 cc167-73
Mr. G. Brown

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Defence whether he will make a statement about the results of Exercise "Spearpoint".

The Minister of Defence (Mr. Harold Watkinson)

Yes, Sir. I welcome the opportunity to set out the facts, which are based on a full report I have had from the Commander-in-Chief in person.

The primary purpose of this exercise was to give commanders and staff practice in handling subordinate formations and units during a period of intensive fighting under both conventional and nuclear conditions. N.A.T.O. military plans call for the ability to conduct both conventional and nuclear operations and this exercise was strictly in accordance with SACEUR's training directive.

This exercise also enabled techniques in co-operation between the Army and the Royal Air Force in reconnaissance and ground attack to be practised on a large scale. Preliminary indications are that the exercise has successfully fulfilled its purpose.

It has not revealed any major deficiencies in B.A.O.R. The Commander-in-Chief is satisfied that, if the situation should require it, the reinforcement plan for placing British forces on a full war footing is sound and practicable.

Mr. Brown

Is the Minister aware that, in some respects, that Answer is rather surprising? With regard to his statement that … military plans call for the ability to conduct both conventional and nuclear operations… is he aware of the statement attributed in the Press to the Commander of the First Corps, who is said to have announced that we are training for a nuclear war in Europe? Is not this in conflict with the right hon. Gentleman's statement?

Secondly, with regard to his statement that the exercise has not revealed any major deficiencies in the B.A.O.R., is not the right hon. Gentleman aware—I am sure that he is—that there is an absolute unanimity among newspaper correspondents, from The Times to the Daily Mail—whichever way one thinks that goes—that there were the most glaring and extraordinary weaknesses both in manpower and in arms and equipment? How does the Minister explain this in the light of his statement?

Thirdly, why does he think that the military commanders went to such extraordinary lengths to impress the newspaper correspondents there present with their weaknesses, real or imaginary? Does he think that this was a very sensible thing to do just at this moment? Will he, perhaps, look further into the matter and give us a more detailed statement?

Mr. Watkinson

I will answer the right hon. Gentleman's three questions. First, as to the nuclear side, when I was in Germany, in June, I went with great care throughout the whole of the tactics and strategy and directives both for the Commander-in-Chief, General Cassels, and General Jones, the Commander of the First Corps. I am, therefore, entirely satisfied—and I have seen General Cassels again this morning—that B.A.O.R. conforms exactly to the N.A.T.O. directive—as, indeed, the exercise, as I have said, conformed to General Norstad's training directive—and that is, of course, that they must practise and train to use both conventional and nuclear weapons.

As to the questions in the Press about deficiencies, it is only fair to add that many of these have already been denied by the War Office, and that one newspaper printed a good many of the denials. The facts are these, and I think that the House knows them. It has never been the practice to maintain the British Army of the Rhine on anything like a full war footing. That has always been so. It is, therefore, also right to stockpile in Germany tanks and equipment that would be needed if the reserves go in to put it on a full war footing.

There is always a discrepancy between this kind of armour and men in an exercise. This exercise was not an attempt at a mock war—that was not thought to be the right thing to do. Those people who had duties in barracks, and so on, stayed at those duties, which they would not have done if there were a war.

As to comments made by General Jones, I looked at the book of the exercise and I saw that the Press correspondents were accommodated in the various messes.

Mr. G. Brown

That is where they got the truth.

Mr. Watkinson

No doubt commanding officers expressed some of their anxieties about recruiting, and so on, which was perfectly justifiable. But the Press should not draw from that the conclusion that B.A.O.R. is not ready to fight, and is not prepared to do so, or that the reinforcement planned does not put it on a proper war footing.

Mr. B. Harrison

Would my right hon. Friend give us an indication of the real strength of B.A.O.R., because, while we accept that it is not practicable to keep the Army up to its full fighting footing at the present time, we have an undertaking to keep 55,000 men in N.A.T.O. and many of us are very worried that we are not anywhere near keeping up to our obligation?

Mr. Watkinson

The allies and N.A.T.O. have been clearly told, first, what is the current strength of B.A.O.R. and, secondly, of the long list of measures we are taking to reinforce it, for instance, sending S.A.G.W. and light A.A. regiments, and forming a reserve division over here, although I will not weary the House with the complete list of measures. All I am saying is that we told N.A.T.O. clearly in July and August what the full position was and we have maintained it.

Mr. Mayhew

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that hon. Members on both sides have not had need to rely on the Press for information about B.A.O.R., but have been to see for themselves and have been properly briefed there and have talked with officers and men at all levels on this subject? Is he aware that what we learned officially, again at all levels, bears no relation whatever to the statement which the right hon. Gentleman has just made?

Is the Minister aware of the serious manpower shortages, shortages of drivers, signallers, medical orderlies and R.A.S.C. personnel? How can the right hon. Gentleman make a statement which is plainly at variance with what hon. Members know, from personal experience, to be the situation?

Mr. Watkinson

Nothing of the sort. I based what I said on a visit in June to the British Army of the Rhine when I had full and detailed talks and secret briefings on everything it has had to do. I had a meeting with the Commander- in-Chief this morning. Of course, there are shortages; because B.A.O.R. is not on a war footing. There were shortages in the exercise because men were not sent out to replace those on leave, on courses, in barracks, or were doing any of the normal things. It was not thought right at this stage to mount an exercise which appeared to be a hostile operation.

Mr. Kershaw

Is it not clear that the reports—in the Daily Mail certainly and The Times possibly—of the newspaper correspondents were based on an entire misconception of what the exercise was designed to do? Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that this was brought home to the correspondents at the time, or does he think that some other machinery may be necessary?

Mr. Watkinson

The Daily Mail had the courtesy to print a long list of War Office corrections which nullified everything it said on its front page. As we have a free Press in a free country it is not for me to say more than that it seems a pity that when this delicate balance between peace and war is so narrowly poised people could, perhaps innocently, try to give false information to an enemy.

Mr. Shinwell

Is the Minister not aware that there is some disquiet, not only in the Press—and we may disregard the Press—but among hon. Members about possible deficiencies in the forces? Is it altogether desirable to disclose deficiencies in public? Has it occurred to the right hon. Gentleman to consider the proposition that has been made several times, not only by hon. Members on this side, but by hon. Members opposite, that he might take into confidence the hon. Members of the Defence Committee opposite—I think that there is a Defence Committee opposite—and those hon. Members on this side who are keenly interested in this subject?

No doubt all hon. Members are interested, but I refer to hon. Members who have some knowledge of the subject so that the facts may be disclosed to them. Then, if necessary, we might have a debate on some future occasion. Meanwhile, what is the purpose of disclosing deficiencies in public?

Mr. Watkinson

I very much agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I think he knows the difficulties, as an ex-Minister of Defence, of saying the many things one would like to say. As to how one deals with his other point, that is not for me but for the Leader of the House.

Mr. B. Harrison

Does my right hon. Friend think that the Russians are unaware of the weaknesses in B.A.O.R. at the present time and the troop movements? Does he not think that the remarks he made about the Press and the dangers of talking about this at the moment are really unnecessary. since the Russians must be fully informed?

Mr. Watkinson

I do not take that view because I do not accept the thesis that B.A.O.R. is grossly undermanned or is deficient in equipment, provided we keep clearly in mind the fact that, at the moment, it is a peace-time force. If the situation should deteriorate our allies know clearly what we should do. We would have a proclamation, send out reserves for which a clear plan is made, and bring the force touts full war-time strength.

Mr. G. Brown

While I understand that point so far as the men are concerned—that one could get them at a pinch—how does the right hon. Gentleman relate that to the deficiencies in the equipment and arms? Unless that equipment and those arms exist, how can they be got at seven days' notice to Germany and, if they do not exist, what is the right hon. Gentleman doing about it?

Mr. Watkinson

I already said that we have a stockpile of arms like tanks, carriers, and so on, for the purpose of being able to fly personnel out there to man them in order to bring the Army to its full operational strength. If there are detailed deficiencies which the right hon. Gentleman thinks that he should bring to our attention, he has the option of putting them down for Question Time. But I am unaware of any major overall deficiencies in B.A.O.R.

Mr. Brown

What did General Jones mean when he said: We are training for a nuclear war in Europe". unless he meant that we are short of conventional equipment and have to rely on the early use of tactical nuclear weapons? That must be what he meant. In that case, what is the Minister doing about the equipment of which we are shoot?

Mr. Watkinson

The right hon. Gentleman is quoting from a newspaper report and I am not prepared to accept it until I have seen General Jones himself and have personally confirmed his statement. I have seen his Commander-in-Chief, who told me what I already knew: that B.A.O.R. conforms exactly to the N.A.T.O. directive, which everyone knows is that they must be prepared to fight both a conventional and a nuclear war.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Russians have a 100-megaton bomb? In the light of this, could he assure us that "Spear-point" is a rehearsal which is likely to give us any assurances, either childish or melodramatic?

Mr. Watkinson

The hon. Gentleman has his own views on this, which are well known.

Mr. Hughes

But what is the answer?

Mr. Paget

Can the Minister say what this exercise was designed to demonstrate? Apparently we were told by the right hon. Gentleman yesterday that we were in a position of great peril.

We have demonstrated to the Russians and to everybody else that it is a peril that we are totally unprepared to meet. We are told that with rehearsals and with reinforcements we might be able to do something about it. What makes the right hon. Gentleman think that the enemy is waiting for our reinforcements?

Mr. Watkinson

First, the purpose of the exercise was given in my original Answer and set out clearly in the handbook of the exercise which was given to everybody taking part. As to who is telling the Russians that we are unprepared—a suggestion which is absolutely untrue—it is the hon. and learned Gentleman.

Back to