§ Q2 Mr Loughlinasked the Prime Minister (1) what action he proposes to take arising out of recent disclosures of official secrets;
§ (2) how many official deep air raid shelters have been constructed; to whom places have been allocated; and in which areas such shelters are situated.
§ Q4. Mr. W. Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister what steps he intends to take to tighten up security in the civil defence field consequent on recent breaches as evidenced by the publication of the pamphlet "Spies for Peace".
§ Q7. Mr. Shinwellasked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the publication of a document which relates to a plan by the Government for the creation of military government in the event of nuclear attack, copies of which have been impounded by Her Majesty's Government.
§ Q8. Mr. Wyattasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the latest breach of security involved in the publication of a document by an organisation describing itself as "Spies for Peace", he will order an investigation into the state of the security services.
§ Q9. Dr. D. Johnsonasked the Prime Minister whether he is satisfied with the present state of the security organisations; and if he will make a statement.
§ Q10. Mr. S. Silvermanasked the Prime Minister what plans the Government have made to carry on government, preserve order and maintain civil administration so 24 far as any of these may be possible after an attack with thermonuclear weapons upon the United Kingdom; to what extent the plans provide for political control by officers and officials charged with such duties; and whether, in view of the widespread anxiety occasioned by recent unofficial disclosures of plans alleged to have been already adopted and partially put into operation, he will make a statement.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)The document to which publicity has been given is concerned with what it described as regional seats of Government. There is nothing mysterious or sinister about their existence. In the last war we had regional commissioners, each with an appropriate staff, whose function was to co-ordinate Government activity in the region and take charge on behalf of the central Government if communications between London and the region broke down at any time. It is widely known that our defensive plans for any future war, whether nuclear or conventional, include provision for a similar, essentially civilian, organisation. What have been referred to as regional seats of Government are, in fact, the headquarters from which the regional commissioners would operate in a war emergency, and considerable progress has been made in their provision. To prepare them and to link them with the headquarters of the local authorities is an obviously essential precaution.
Although the existence of these headquarters has long been widely known, their exact location and the details of their organisation have not been publicised. The information on these matters in the document referred to seems clearly to have come from papers issued to the large number of persons who took part in the Fallex exercise last September. This exercise, in which all the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation countries took part, was designed to test the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation mobilisation and command organisation; and we used it as an opportunity of testing also our warning organisation and our system of regional headquarters.
The Government would be failing in their duty if they did not take steps from time to time to carry out such tests and to ensure that these headquarters could operate if the need arose.
25 Nevertheless, the deliberate breach of security is in itself both serious and strongly to be condemned. The disclosure of the particular information involved is not seriously damaging to the national interest. Nevertheless vigorous steps are being taken to try to identify the person or persons responsible.
A home defence exercise of this character requires the services of large numbers of people from a wide variety of occupations. This must give rise to some security risk.
There is little resemblance between this affair and cases of espionage where vital secrets have been involved.
§ Mr. LoughlinDoes not the Prime Minister yet realise that his biggest problem—and the biggest problem of the Government—arises through the attaching of secrecy to things that are not secret? Is it not about time that we got away from this cloak-and-dagger mentality? Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second Question that I put to him, namely, how many of these deep air raid shelters there are, and to whom places in them have been allocated—especially in view of the fact that his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary denied the existence of these R.S.G.s, and of any deep air raid shelters, in answer to a Question that I tabled a short time ago? Will the Prime Minister get away from this secrecy, and start being grown-up?
§ The Prime MinisterDocuments are labelled according to various grades of secret information, as everybody knows. As for the shelters, regional commissioners will operate not in deep air raid shelters but in shelters sited in various places, some of which will provide some protection against fall-out. The principle is exactly the same as that which we operated in the last war, with the regional commissioner system.
§ Mr. HamiltonSince the Prime Minister admits that it is almost impossible to keep these places secret, would it not be far better to be perfectly frank with the House and the country, and tell the people where they are, what they are there for, and by whom they will be occupied? If it is necessary to build these deep shelters for the Government and not for civilians, will the Prime Minister tell us who will be governed?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no question of building deep air raid shelters. That has long been stated to be impossible, on a large scale. This is simply an arrangement by which the regional commissioners will be placed in suitable locations. Some of them will be underground, but not all, and they will be adapted where necessary to improve the protection afforded against fall-out. But we have also to remember that there is a possibility of a conventional war, as well as the terror of nuclear war, and all these precautions are necessary in that event.
§ Mr. ShinwellWould not the Government—indeed any Government—be justified in taking every possible and practicable precaution in order to protect the community in the event of war, either conventional or nuclear? In view of the unofficial disclosure which has created considerable disquiet in the country, does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that it would be far better if the Government made a clean breast of the whole situation and informed the public of what precautions are being taken on its behalf in the event of war? May I put this further point to the right hon. Gentleman? Does not he regard this—which he considers a breach of security—as another failure on the part of the Government in this sphere of security arrangements?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. I think that there are gradations in this matter. In this exercise in which something of the order of 4,000 people took part, it was not possible to maintain the kind of security which one hopes to maintain over secret weapons or other very important Government secrets. At the same time there is no need to publicise them and I think that what has been done seems to be in accordance with common sense.
§ Mr. G. BrownMay I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the country is very puzzled by what is a secret here and what is embarrassing? Does not he see the difference? There are references to regional seats of Government, publication about which I could well understand would be embarrassing, but not necessarily secret, especially in view of the fact that large numbers of people—as the right hon. Gentleman has told us—already know 27 about them. Yet the Government are maintaining the D notice provision, which clearly relates to secrecy, for something which clearly cannot be kept a secret. Does not the Prime Minister think that the time has come to stop that nonsense and to remove the D notice provision and allow that part to be known, as it is so well known now?
May I put a further point regarding the Fallex exercise? Is that not in quite a different category? It may well be that 4,000 people took part in the exercise, but does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that 4,000 people would not have got the results of the exercise? This information got out from a very much smaller group, did it not? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that that is in the secrecy category, and does not he agree that he ought to find out how the Government once again have proved to be fallible on their secrets so far as that point is concerned? May I ask one more matter on the regional seats of government? Is not it true, or is it true, that a Minister publicly opened the R.S.G. in Somerset?
§ The Prime MinisterThere are really three questions here. May I take the last one? The R.S.G. in Somerset was not of this character. It was opened in 1961 and it has regard to the work of the Observer Corps and nothing to do with what the right hon. Gentleman was pursuing. With regard to the first part of the Question, D notices were issued long before this incident occurred to cover the location, communications and physical characteristics of the individual regional headquarters. The Press has accepted the restriction most loyally, and I should like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to their recognition that this was a sensible use of the D notice procedure. With regard to the last question—the second question which the right hon. Gentleman interposed in the three—of course not all the 4,000 people would have this particular information, but quite a large number of people. At the same time, I regard this as a great breach of confidence by those who were guilty of this, and the object of the Special Branch will be to try, by its inquiries, to pin the responsibility where it lies.
§ Dr. JohnsonI thank my right hon. Friend for his statement. Is not he 28 aware of the general anxiety about the penetration of the campaign responsible for this document? Is he aware, for instance, that the British Film Institute which receives a substantial grant from the Treasury of over £100,000 a year, shows a C.N.D. propaganda film at its theatre, the National Film Theatre on the South Bank, and liaises with school film societies, making their members free associates to encourage them to come to this theatre? I should be the last to advocate censorship of the arts in any form. But does not my right hon. Friend consider it undesirable that the Government should subsidise their own subversive propaganda in this way?
§ The Prime MinisterI appreciate the point of my right hon. Friend's question, and the anxiety which he feels. Nevertheless, this raises very wide issues, which we have debated from time to time on security matters in this House. We can, of course—any Government can, of whatever political complexion—run a very closely controlled State, almost a police State. If we want absolute security, we have to do that. What gives me some comfort is that those countries which have been so operated have not been successful when the time came.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanWill the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that many people in this House, and many people in the country, will be grateful to him for the information which he has at last given to the House and the country with regard to this matter? Will he also realise that the parallel which he drew of the regional commissioners in the last war, though acceptable and sound in principle, has this difference: that in those days everybody knew who the regional commissioners were; that the House had full cognisance of the matter; that it was debated in the House of Commons and no one thought at that time that there was any reason why these matters should be kept from the people of this country under D notices, or accusations of treason or any other such nonsense? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that these matters are so vital, in the literal sense, to the whole population of this country that he ought now to take the House of Commons into his full confidence and afford us an opportunity to discuss all these matters, and all the matters which 29 are connected with them, particularly the matter of the political control of people put in administrative authority?
§ The Prime MinisterI am grateful for the tribute, even if it was unexpected, which the hon. Gentleman gave me in the first part of his supplementary question. Regarding the second part, perhaps my recollection is not quite as clear as his—we were both Members of the House at that time—but I do not recall that these matters were discussed in detail. Nor do I recall that the regional commissioners came into being except shortly before, or indeed after, the outbreak of war. Happily we are not in such a situation today.
§ Mr. ZilliacusIs not the root of the trouble in this matter the fact that the Government, in their attempts to make their nuclear deterrent strategy credible—[Interruption.]—have succeeded in making their civil defence policy so incredible that anyone who exposes its sheer unreality is regarded as performing a service to the nation?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not wish to intervene in these internal disputes.
§ Mr. GrimondWhile much of the information in this pamphlet may not be of great importance—so much so that it might have been better had it been fully disclosed—nevertheless, coming on top of other leaks of secret information, must not this cause some concern that more damaging information may leak out? Will the Prime Minister assure the House that he has not only informed the Special Branch, but is taking all other steps to see that really important and damaging information does not leak out from exercises such as he mentioned.
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman will recall the discussion on the Report made by Lord Radcliffe on the Blake case which showed, to me at any rate, the extreme efficiency of the security services, to whom we owe so much, in the very difficult task they have to perform. I do not think that there is any real analogy between an act of espionage by a single individual who turns traitor and a leakage of this kind which, however reprehensible, is not on the same basis or of the same quality.
§ Mr. LongdenDoes not my right hon. Friend agree that much wider publication 30 of the Government's plans for defending the population in the event of a nuclear attack might have two good results? First, it would add to the morale of the population, some of whom are undoubtedly—wrongly, I know—apt to think that the Government have no plans except to cater for a few at the top. Secondly, it would add to the value of the deterrent by making the targets seem less worth-while. May I ask another question? Has not the time come to transfer the responsibility for civil defence from the Home Office to the Minister of Defence?
§ The Prime MinisterThese are a number of matters all of which I would be glad to consider, but I must emphasise that it is our duty to make what preparations we can. In the regional sphere I think the experience of the last war showed that this system was a good one. It may be, as I said, that we might have to face a conventional war either for a short period or for a longer period. No one knows, but it is no good pretending if we have to face a nuclear war, if the countries of Europe decided or the West and the East decided to embark on a campaign of that kind, that it would not be mutually destructive of everything that they cherish. Of course we know that. It is no use trying to disguise from ourselves the truth of that. That is why we try so hard and work so hard to do everything we can to prevent such a horror descending on the world, but that does not relieve us from the duty of doing what we can in the sphere under our control.
§ Mr. G. BrownIs the Prime Minister aware that he has not made clear to the House whether this was a grievous breach of national security or something which, while embarrassing, does not matter all that much? Which is it? Secondly, since the effect of the D notice procedure nowadays is simply to prevent, on the R.S.G. aspect, the British public knowing what every Government in the world knows, what is the point of maintaining the D notice?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman, as so often, over-simplifies the problems with which he is from time to time faced. The D notice covers a very large number of details, some of which I have described. It is quite different to 31 publicise in detail everything a Government are doing. That is quite different from the misfortune of something leaking out.
Mr. H. WilsonNo one will accuse the Prime Minister of over-simplifying. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether in his view there has been a disturbing loss of essential security in this matter or whether there has not? Secondly, while we all understand the general position of the D notice in this particular instance, since this information is now known to about half the country—the information in the document including this rather disturbing revelation of the Fallex operation—and known to all overseas Governments and a lot of people in this country, what is the purpose of keeping on the D notice in respect of the individual items contained in this document?
§ The Prime MinisterI doubt very much whether this is known to half the country. If the right hon. Member were to weigh his words a little more carefully—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Is he really saying that one out of every two people in the country could tell us the location of the regional headquarters? Of course not. It is not so. The D notice covers more than the location, the question of communications systems, their physical characteristics and all kinds of details. I repeat that I am grateful to the Press for so loyally keeping to the requests made to them.
Mr. WilsonWeighing my words with a great deal less frivolity than the Prime Minister has shown this afternoon, may I ask if he is aware that all the details in this document have been broadcast on Prague Radio and a lot of what Prague Radio said has been published in one of the British newspapers?—[Interruption.]—I read the Daily Telegraph which printed what was said on Prague Radio. Would the Prime Minister now say, since so much of this has come out, and overseas Governments have been made aware of so much, the British Press and a considerable number of people in this country, why he has to keep on a D notice in respect of the particular infor- 32 motion contained in this reprehensible document?
§ The Prime Minister"Half the people of this country" has now sunk to "a considerable number of people in this country". I do not believe that half the people of this country listen to Prague Radio—at least, I hope they do not. The only question is whether the right hon. Member or anyone really considers it the duty of the Government seriously as a result of this matter leaking out to publicise every detail. Not at all. I think we are far better to stand on the position where we are. There is no reason why we should give all these details. Nor is there any demand so far as I know from the Press, which perfectly loyally has kept to the D notice system.
§ Mr. SpeakerHere is the difficulty——
§ Mr. LoughlinMay I put a point of order?
§ Mr. SpeakerIn a moment. Here is the difficulty. Further indulgence of the Opposition Front Bench would involve further questions from the other side of the House in order to make it fair, and we would not get on with the business Mr. Loughlin, on a point of order.
§ Mr. LoughlinPerhaps you noted, Mr. Speaker, that I had two Questions on the Order Paper to the Prime Minister. They are Questions No. 2 and No. 3. Incidentally, I have asked only one supplementary question. The Prime Minister said that he would answer these Questions together but, so far, he has not answered my Question No. 3. May I ask him to answer it?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat is not a point of order for me. I have no power to compel anyone to answer a Question.
§ Mr. LoughlinThen, in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Prime Minister's Answer, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.