§ 1. Sir Richard Glynasked the Secretary of State for War if he has yet taken a decision on the reorganisation of the Infantry.
§ The Secretary of State for War (Mr. John Profumo)Yes, Sir. I have now received the Bower Committee's Report and, after considering this question very fully, I have concluded that there is no requirement for any further radical reorganisation of the Infantry.
However, I am sure that we should encourage a further move towards the idea of the Large Infantry Regiment. Experience with those Brigades which have gone some way towards the large Regiment concept is already showing its advantages. I hope this will continue to gather momentum.
If in the future any further contraction or expansion of the Infantry becomes necessary, I am satisfied that there is more than one way of effecting this; and therefore that it is unnecessary to impose any uniform solution throughout the Infantry as a whole, such as making it mandatory for all the traditional names of Infantry battalions to be abolished.
There is no doubt, however, that there are considerable organisational advantages in the four-Battalion as compared with the three-Battalion Brigade. I am satisfied that it would secure a greater improvement in the Infantry organisation to reduce the number of three-Battalion Brigades. I am therefore proposing to disperse the Forester Brigade 350 and link the Battalions concerned with other neighbouring three-Battalion Brigades. This will give us ten Brigades of four-Battalions and leave us with only three of three.
I would like to take this opportunity of expressing my gratitude to Sir Roger Bower and his colleagues for the important work they have done in this connection.
§ Sir Richard GlynCan my right hon. Friend assure the House that this move will in no way reduce the number of Battalions in the British Army? Further, can he say whether it will have any effect on the identity of the present Battalions?
§ Mr. ProfumoThe move that I have announced does not constitute a cutting in any way, but the Infantry will now be in a stronger position to meet any minor reductions which might have to take place in the future.
§ Mr. ShinwellSince the Minister has come to a decision about reorganisation of the Infantry, may I ask him whether he has made up his mind about the rôle to be played by the Gurkha Battalions? Do they fit into this new scheme of reorganisation?
§ Mr. ProfumoNo, Sir. That is a wider question. The Gurkha do not fit into the announcement that I have made today, which purely concerns United Kingdom infantry of the line. It does not have anything to do with the Brigade of Gurkha. Later, the overall size of the Army will have something to do with the retention of the Gurkhas.
§ Sir Richard GlynWill my right hon Friend deal with the part of my supplementary question in which I asked him to give an assurance that there will be no change of identity in the present Battalions?
§ Mr. ProfumoWithin Battalions, yes.
§ Mr. MorrisWill this have any effeot on the size of the Battalion itself?
§ Mr. ProfumoNo, Sir. This is concerned purely with the grouping organisation, and it is being done because I am sure that the forward-looking concept of the Infantry organisation is that of the Large Infantry Regiment.