HC Deb 01 May 1967 vol 746 cc90-4
56. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about his recent visit to the Far East regarding British commitments and forces there.

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Denis Healey)

I visited Singapore and Malaysia for the primary purpose of discussing with the Commander-in-Chief and with the two Governments concerned how best we might achieve further reductions in the theatre as a whole by April, 1968, on the lines I had indicated in the defence debate. I also met the trade union leaders in Singapore and Kuala Lumpur.

As a result of the visit, and subject to discussion of the details in London, I believe that it will be possible to reduce by April next year the total number of men and women working in or for the Services by about 20,000 compared with the total at the end of "confrontation". In addition, I had some preliminary discussions about the scope for further reductions during the next two or three years; and I obtained a great deal of information which will form a basis for further examination and discussion both at home and abroad during the next few weeks and months.

The Governments of Singapore and Malaysia both understand our position and I believe that the possibilities we have under consideration for the next few years will enable changes to be made in an orderly way without unacceptable consequences, provided that we keep in close contact with one another.

Mr. Allaun

Will the men be brought home, or are they to be sent to other bases abroad? Secondly, will my right hon. Friend resist American pressure to maintain our other very large forces which would still remain in the Far East?

Mr. Healey

I cannot guarantee that every British soldier, sailor or airman will come home, but there will be a net reduction in our forces serving overseas by the number withdrawn from Singapore and Malaysia.

In all these matters we shall, of course, take account of the views of our allies, but the reduction by 20,000 is a firm decision, subject, of course, to clearing the details in discussion with my colleagues and military advisers in London.

Mr. Powell

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the specific reductions which he was discussing were those envisaged and forecast in the defence debates earlier this year? Will he agree that when any further reductions are envisaged, it would be right for a statement to be made to the House at an early stage and that the change in policy which is involved should be properly debated? Finally, will he bear in mind, in the light of the lessons of Aden, the inadvisability of making long-range dated forecasts of withdrawals without knowledge of the circumstances?

Mr. Healey

I am glad to see that the right hon. Gentleman is retreating from the position which he took up at his party's Brighton Conference not so long ago. On the serious part of his question, the reduction by a total of 20,000 is, of course, as I forecast in my speech to the House in the defence debate. Any further reductions on which we may decide in the following few years will, of course, be indicated and explained to the House at the proper time.

Mr. Mayhew

What relation does this bear to our continuing defence commitments in Asia? Does the Prime Minister's statement of last June on continuing defence commitments in Asia throughout the 1970s still represent Government policy?

Mr. Healey

My hon. Friend may be aware that, contrary to his expectations a year ago, confrontation came to an end in August, last year, and that has greatly reduced the military task of our forces.

Sir Alec Douglas-Home

The right hon. Gentleman's answer to his hon. Friend is hardly complete. Under the S.E.A.T.O. Treaty we have an obligation. It is for us to decide what help we give our allies, but the obligation is there in respect of Thailand.

Mr. Healey

As so often, the right hon. Gentleman has put the matter precisely right. We have an obligation under the S.E.A.T.O. Treaty, but it is for us, in consultation with our allies, to decide precisely how we meet that obligation in terms of military forces.

Mr. Maxwell

In his discussion with the Prime Minister of Singapore, what commitment did my right hon. Friend make in respect of maintaining employment in Singapore, having regard to the planned withdrawal? What does he propose to do to assure Australia that we do not intend to leave them in the hands of the United States alone in connection with their defence requirements?

Mr. Healey

Of course, we are in consultation with the Australian Government the whole time. On the first part of the question, I made it clear to the House in the defence debate that reduction in base facilities will mean redundancy in locally employed or enlisted personnel. I discussed this aspect of the problem with the Prime Minister of Singapore and other Singapore Ministers, and also, as it affects Malaysia, with the Malaysian Government. I am glad to be able to tell the House that we are all confident that we could meet this side of the problem providing that we keep in close contact on the phasing of such a programme. I was in a position to tell the two Governments that Her Majesty's Government are prepared to provide significant aid, if required, to meet the consequences of the run-down.

Mr. Hugh Fraser

Would the right hon. Gentleman go a little further about the assurances to our S.E.A.T.O. allies? I think that his statement could be misinterpreted, especially in respect of the New Zealanders and Australians who have troops fighting on the mainland of Asia. Would he go a little further?

Mr. Healey

We have always made it clear that although it is, of course, for the Australian and New Zealand Governments to decide whether it is right for them to fight in Vietnam, this is not a decision that we would wish to take as far as the British Government are concerned.

Mr. Bellenger

What will happen to the military personnel who are being brought home from the Far East and, as I also understand, from B.A.O.R.? Will they have any effect on our recruiting targets for the Regular Forces?

Mr. Healey

I made it clear a year ago in the debate on the Defence White Paper that the final achievement of the Defence Review targets will require some reduction in the ceilings of recruitment in all three Services.

Mr. Sandys

Am I right in assuming from the answer given by the right hon. Gentleman to my right hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell) that the Government are not, at present at any rate, contemplating any further reductions beyond those which he has announced?

Mr. Healey

No, Sir. Exactly the contrary. I thought that I had made it clear that we were contemplating further reductions beyond those which I have announced over the next 12 months.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Did the trade unionists whom my right hon. Friend consulted express any opposition to the base being used in a war against China?

Mr. Healey

No, Sir. The trade unionists to whom I spoke were concerned exclusively, and I think very naturally, with the employment and conditions of their members.