HC Deb 01 May 1968 vol 763 cc1099-102
37. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what countries east of Suez have now been consulted on security measures when British Forces are withdrawn.

52. Mr. Cronin

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made in his defence discussions with Australia.

Mr. Healey

As my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary said yesterday—[Vol. 763, c. 166–7]—we have had some exchanges of view with Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore, and in June we will be joining these countries in a conference to consider problems connected with future defence arrangements for the area consequent upon our withdrawal.

We have explained our intentions to our S.E.A.T.O. partners and, as regards our withdrawal from the Persian Gulf, the consultations envisaged by the Prime Minister in his statement to the House on 16th January have begun.

Mr. Cronin

In view of the disquiet in Australia about the impending defence arrangements and this rather unstable and very large population in the middle of the Pacific, will my right hon. Friend do everything he can to assuage Australian opinion as to the future defence arrangements?

Mr. Healey

Of course, the purpose of this conference is to make all the progress we can in establishing alternative security arrangements for the area after our withdrawal, but I am pretty hopeful that we shall make substantial progress in June.

Mr. Doughty

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the views in Australia are very derogatory of this proposal to withdraw from the Pacific and that it would not be possible to make any arrangements unless bases are kept in places like Singapore or elsewhere in the Pacific.

Mr. Healey

I do not accept that view, and it is certainly not held by the Australian Government, or they would not be joining us at the conference in Malaysia in June, since they wish to discuss with us and our other Commonwealth partners what arrangements can be made for mutual defence in the area when our bases have been finally liquidated.

Mr. Barnett

Can my right hon. Friend give any indication as to when the Australians might be spending as much on defence as a proportion of their G.N.P. as we are?

Mr. Healey

Australia is certainly spending a substantially smaller proportion of her G.N.P. on defence than Britain; Mr. Gorton has quite properly indicated his intention to put Australian interests first in this matter, so I do not think that they will complain if we do the same with British interests.

Mr. Maudling

Since the Government have broken many definite defence obligations to countries in the Gulf, would the right hon. Gentleman put forward at the conference suggestions for alternative ways of making Britain's word good?

Mr. Healey

First, I cannot accept that we have broken any defence agreements in the Gulf—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—certainly not. I cannot accept the assumption of the right hon. Gentleman's question, but, of course, in our consultations with the Gulf States and other States interested in the security of the Gulf, our main concern is to ensure that arrangements for stability and peace can be made for the period after our withdrawal.

Mr. Maudling

If the right hon. Gentleman does not accept my statement about the breaking of obligations, may I refer him to the Prime Minister's answer in which he said that he would list the obligations which the Government had broken?

Mr. Healey

The right hon. Gentleman knows very well that the Prime Minister gave no such undertaking. He has never said that Britain has broken any obligations, and nor have we done so, in the Gulf.

Mr. Shinwell

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that the primary obligation in relation to defence east of Suez is based on the ANZUS pact in which we do not share?

Mr. Healey

Yes, I am well aware that the treaty on which Australia and New Zealand base their security is one of which Britain is not a member, but I must tell the House—I hope that we will not make too many debating points on this—that this Government, and, I believe, the Opposition as well, have often stated their belief that, if Australia or New Zealand were ever under direct attack, we would regard it as our obligation to go to their assistance as they came to ours twice in the past.

38. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total cost to Government Departments in the return of members of the Forces and their families from the areas east of Suez in transport accommodation, and other services.

Mr. Reynolds

The total cost of the withdrawal from east of Suez will depend to a great extent on its phasing and cannot be estimated at present; but, as I hold the House in the defence debate, I hope to give more information about it later this year when detailed planning is further advanced.

Mr. Shinwell

Is this good enough? When the Government decided to withdraw forces east of Suez by 1970, surely they must have formed an estimate of the total cost? Are we to be left in the dark about this? May it not be that the withdrawal of forces east of Suez will be more costly than retaining the forces there?

Mr. Reynolds

I can assure my right hon. Friend that, taken over a period of years in the early 1970s, the cost of withdrawal will mean a considerable net saving to the Exchequer, even after allowing for such economic or other aid which may have to be given to the countries from which we withdraw. There was a big cost of withdrawal from B.A.O.R. and Aden, but it was largely on barracks and married quarters in this country, and I am hoping that, in the time scale and subject to the phasing of the withdrawal, there will be little expenditure of that kind this time.

Sir A. V. Harvey

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, in Malta, there are good barracks, married quarters, schools and hospitals? Will he discuss this with the Malta Government with a view to making full use of those facilities, where the troops and their families like living, rather than pushing up the cost of homes in this country?

Mr. Reynolds

As I told my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell), this time I do not expect, subject to the phasing of the withdrawal, that there will be much necessity for extra barrack or married quarters accommodation.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

In view of the obligations being broken, is not the real answer to this Question, "Thirty pieces of silver"?