§ 25. Mr. Wallasked the Minister of Defence if he will make a statement on the examination of the higher organisation of defence and the possible reorganisation of his Department and the Service Departments.
§ Mr. ThorneycroftAn examination is being made to see whether any changes in the central organisation for defence are desirable in the light of developments in our armed forces and military strategy since the current arrangements were announced in the 1958 White Paper. Lord Ismay and Sir Ian Jacob have kindly agreed to assist me with consideration of this problem. The House will, of course, be informed of any changes which the Government may decide to make as a result of this examination.
§ Mr. WallIs it not a fact that the decision about Polaris could bring up such questions as the future of the 71 Royal Air Force and the conventional Navy, and is it not, therefore, the psychological moment to start a long-term investigation into the possible future amalgamation of the Services? Can my right hon. Friend say whether the statement he has made could cover this question?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftIt could cover it. But I should not like to give the impression that I was contemplating amalgamating all the Services. The main purpose of this consideration is directed to the central organisation.
§ Mr. ShinwellWas it necessary to appoint a committee consisting of Lord Ismay and Sir Ian Jacob to undertake this task? Is not it the case that in the last ten years we have had eight or nine Ministers of Defence, and have not they made up their minds, on the basis of their own experience, that the existence of three Service Departments, with the Ministry of Defence, is completely outmoded and that what is desirable is a form of integration?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftThere might be something in that comment if I had appointed a committee. But it is not a committee. I have asked two very distinguished soldiers, with great experience in the central organisation of defence, to help me in working out the answers to some of these problems.
§ Sir H. Legge-BourkeI recognise that few people have greater experience of the machinery of Government in connection with defence than has Lord Ismay in relation to the period both before and during the Second World War. But can my right hon. Friend give us more indication of what were the terms of reference given to Lord Ismay and Sir Ian Jacob?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftOnly to the extent that a great deal of consideration—as was said by the right hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell)—has been given over the years to the question of how best the central organisation for defence should be run, including what should be its relations with Chiefs of Staff, the Service Ministries and the rest. There has been a great deal of argument about whether there ought to be more centralisation or less. A number of plans have been made and various suggestions 72 advanced inside and outside the Department. In considering them, and any ideas of my own, I thought it would be helpful to call in, not a committee, but two men who, as will be acknowledged from both sides of the House, have special experience in this field, to help me form my conclusions about what. should be the next step.
§ Mr. WoodburnMay I ask the Minister whether he is aware that at the end of the last war the appreciation was that in any future war one of the first tasks of the Army would be in connection with Civil Defence? Has the right hon. Gentleman considered all this in connection with the defence of the country? Is he bringing in the matter of the organisation of Civil Defence as part of this large question?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftThe question of the organisation of Civil Defence is more a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. Nevertheless, the right hon. Gentleman is quite right. These things are linked and I will bear in mind the suggestion he has made.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerWill the Minister make arrangements for a debate on Civil Defence during the coming months?
§ Mr. ThorneycroftIt does not quite fall within my responsibilities to arrange the business of the House. But I will pass on the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion through the usual channels.