HC Deb 24 October 1968 vol 770 cc1597-605

The following Questions stood upon the Order Paper:

67. Mr. WALL

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to control known agitators in view of the widespread incitement to violence now taking place in preparation for demonstrations in London later this month.

72. Mr. DEEDES

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consultations he has had with the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis about the demonstration planned for 27th October in Central London; and if he will make a statement.

80. Mr. GOODHART

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what special protective equipment will be issued to the Metropolitan Police before the planned demonstration on 27th October in view of the probability that policemen on duty will be injured.

83. Mr. LIPTON

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what restrictions he will impose on marchers in Central London on 27th October next.

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. James Callaghan)

I will, with permission, Mr. Speaker, now answer Questions Nos. 67, 72, 80 and 83.

The Vietnam Solidarity Campaign and other bodies have sponsored a series of demonstrations this week which are intended to culminate in a demonstration in London on 27th October. The organisers of the main procession have agreed with the police that the route should be from the Embankment near Charing Cross, by Ludgate Circus, Fleet Street and the Strand to Whitehall. Some of those taking part propose to part company with the main procession at Trafalgar Square and proceed to Grosvenor Square.

This series of demonstrations has been preceded by a spate of advance publicity and it seems possible that Sunday's procession will be attended by large numbers of people. The organisers have proclaimed their intentions that the demonstration shall be peaceful, but rumours have been spread about the intention of certain hooligan elements to use violence or to try to provoke the police into using violence, and these have led to proposals that the procession should be prohibited.

I have considered this situation with the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, but he does not think it necessary to use his power under the Public Order Act, 1936 to prohibit the demonstration. He will have a large force of police officers on duty, who will seek to facilitate peaceful demonstration. By using their traditional methods, they will enforce the law and arrest alleged offenders. Penalties on conviction are matters for the courts, which have power to impose sentences of imprisonment for a variety of offences.

I have issued instructions that foreign students and other aliens with convictions for violence shall not be allowed to come here to take part in the demonstration. Aliens who do take part are expected to observe the law; if they do not do so, they must take the consequences.

I have thought carefully about the general issues of freedom and order. There is an evident risk where large numbers of people gather. But I believe that the great majority of those who take part will wish to avoid violence. My conclusion is that, in the absence of plain evidence of widespread violence, interference with the right to hold meetings, even of this size, would be a bad precedent which would endanger freedom in this country.

The demonstrators themselves should be in no doubt that the general public expects from them a peaceful, well-conducted and orderly demonstration. Otherwise, they will forfeit sympathy both for their cause and for themselves.

Mr. Deedes

While, personally, I agree strongly that it would be a mistake to call the march off, may I ask for an assurance that, bearing in mind the estimates the right hon. Gentleman will have got from the police of the balance of forces likely to be involved, conditions can and will be imposed on the organisers to ensure as far as possible that matters do not get out of hand?

Mr. Callaghan

Yes, Sir. That is the intention of the Commissioner in seeking discussions with the organisers of the demonstration, who carry a very heavy responsibility if they call large numbers of people together. It is the intention of the police to try to agree routes—as they have, indeed, already done—and the conditions under which the meetings are held so that there shall be as little interference with the rights of ordinary citizens as possible.

Mr. Goodhart

In view of the possibility that deliberate attempts will be made to injure policemen, what special protective equipment will be issued to those on duty?

Mr. Callaghan

I have discussed this matter with the Commissioner, in view of the hon. Gentleman's Question, but he does not believe that there is need for special protective equipment. The police intend to stick to their traditional methods of controlling processions and crowds.

Mr. Lipton

While upholding the right to demonstrate and to express opposition to the war in Vietnam, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that the motley crew of crackpots who are responsible for this demonstration are quite incapable of organising a peaceful march? They are already squabbling among themselves and will probably be fighting among themselves on Sunday. In these circumstances, while approving the right to demonstrate, is it not taking a great risk to allow a series of marches to take place in various parts of London next Sunday?

Mr. Callaghan

If I had different advice from responsible quarters I would consider it, but the most responsible advice on which I can rely is that of the Commissioner. Although he accepts, as I do, that there is a risk in this matter, nevertheless we believe that the balance lies in allowing the demonstration and the march to take place rather than in running the risks which would also be inherent in banning it.

Mr. Hogg

While I accept that the Home Secretary and the Commissioner must make up their own minds in the light of the material they have available and, therefore, accept full responsibility for the arrangements in that sense, may I press the right hon. Gentleman on the lines of what has been put to him by the hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton)?

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is a profound difference between the legitimate right to protest about the war in Vietnam—which very few Members in this House, whatever they think about it, would wish to interfere with—and the exploitation for an ulterior motive of that feeling in order to assemble or mobilise, as I believe the phrase is, a crowd of such proportions and with such disparity with the police that this must, of itself, give rise to anxiety as to the possibility of personal injury and damage to property?

Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that it is this distinction which lies at the root of the anxiety about this demonstration?

Mr. Callaghan

I think that everything I have said so far conveys that I have anxieties about this procession and meeting on Sunday. I have had to consider the consequences very carefully. As I have said, the overwhelming number of people attending the demonstration are likely to be those concerned passionately with the issue of peace in Vietnam. They must be careful not to allow themselves to be exploited by a very tiny minority of people who are basically not concerned with that issue, but with the undermining or destruction of the very institutions which enable protests to be made.

Mr. Peter M. Jackson

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his statement, and on the Press statement put out over the weekend, but would he not agree that the most efficacious way in which this possible conflict could be prevented is by persuading his right hon. Friends on the Front Bench to dissociate themselves from the policy in Vietnam?

Mr. Callaghan

That does not arise within my direct responsibility for the procession on Sunday. We all have our views about the war. I know of no one who does not want the conflict brought to an early conclusion, but the question I have to address myself to is whether, by taking action that would prevent people from protesting, I would be more likely to endanger the Queen's peace than ensure it. The conclusion I have reached is that I should not take such action.

Mr. John Smith

While protecting the freedom of people to demonstrate, as he should, will the right hon. Gentleman also bear in mind and protect the freedom of my constituents to spend a quiet Sunday in and around their own homes—[Interruption.] Yes, in and around their own homes; this demonstration is not taking place in Pompeii—free from the fear of injury and loss?

Mr. Callaghan

I think that it is a consequence of all processions—whether they be the Lord Mayor's Show in the City or the Durham Miners' Gala, both of which are great national traditional processions—that the peace of those living on the routes is disturbed. That is a natural result of processions.

Mr. Winnick

Is my right hon. Friend aware that believers in democratic rights are grateful that he has resisted the strong pressures to ban the march? Does not he agree that, if the march had been banned, it would have been playing into the hands of the more irresponsible elements who want a violent flare-up on Sunday?

Mr. Callaghan

I am aware that many people who are not so strongly concerned with the issue of Vietnam would have found it very welcome indeed if I had banned the procession—and not for the reasons most people have in mind.

Mr. Crowder

Is the Home Secretary satisfied that the Commissioner will have sufficient reserves at his disposal on Sunday if by any chance this demonstration should get out of hand?

Mr. Callaghan

It is always a matter of speculation as to how large a group is likely to assemble on such an occasion. The Commissioner has all the men at his disposal that he thinks he would need, and he is satisfied within the reasonable bounds of possibility that they are sufficient to facilitate a peaceful demonstration.

Mr. Lubbock

Is it not unfortunately true that, whatever the size of the demontration, the Government are unlikely to change their policy on Vietnam? Would it not be a good thing, therefore, if people who are considering this procession were to bear that in mind and consider other ways of bringing their protest to the attention of hon. Members who may be like-minded with themselves? The best way of ensuring that the demonstration is peaceful lies in the closest possible cooperation between the organisers and the police, which, fortunately, has taken place so far.

Mr. Callaghan

I agree with the hon. Gentleman's last sentence. As regards the first part of his supplementary question, there is no prospect that the Government will depart from their view that they desire to see the conflict brought to an end on honourable terms as quickly as possible.

Mr. Shinwell

Would it not have a salutary effect on the morale of those who are determined to oppose the American attitude towards Vietnam if those hon. Members who agreed with the marchers attended the demonstration and used their great influence to prevent anything in the nature of violence?

Mr. Callaghan

I think that I have enough to do to answer for myself without charging myself with the responsibility for what other hon. Members do. I would like to see a little of the spirit of my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) present on the occasion, but I am not quite sure what the consequences would be.

Mr. Doughty

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his statement. I am sure that we all wish to wait to see whether the steps he is taking are sufficient. But does not he realise that, last Thursday, I asked the Leader of the House when the statement would be made and I was told that it would be made before the House rose? Yet the next night, on television, the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary made much the same statement as he has made to us today. Is it not usual for statements of this importance to be made to the House of Commons first?

Mr. Callaghan

I do not think that I was discourteous to the House. In fact, the hon. Member who put down the Question and kindly postponed it for a week at my request did so because he and I both thought that I would have rather more up-to-date information to give after a week. Before I went on television I paid the courtesy to the hon. Member of seeing him and explaining what happened.

Mr. Heffer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a number of hon. Members will be at the demonstration as observers from the National Council for Civil Liberties and it may be that other hon. Members will be there in support of the campaign? Is he aware that the numbers of people who are likely to get involved in actual conflict with the police are infinitestimal? Is he aware that I have been studying the literature of these groups very closely in the last two weeks and that it is quite clear that, unless the police are provoked and allow themselves to be provoked by a very tiny minority, we are hardly likely to get any violence in this demonstration?

Mr. Callaghan

I think that we had better wait and see on the day. I shall be waiting as eagerly and as anxiously as most hon. Members will to see what the consequences are on Sunday.

Mr. Maude

Is the Home Secretary aware that what is causing most alarm is not the possible incompetence of the organisers, as the hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) suggested, but the fact that some of the organisers and their associates have openly stated in the past that a demonstration at which violence does not take place or can be provoked is a failure?

Mr. Callaghan

I am aware of this. This is part of a modern philosophy which has grown up very recently among a tiny group of people. My job is to try to protect the great mass of ordinary freedom-loving people from having their freedom curtailed by the existence of this miserable philosophy.

Sir C. Mott-Radclyffe

Is the Home Secretary aware that, according to Press reports, there could be 100,000 demonstrators plus an unknown but large number of other students who do not want the demonstrators to demonstrate and a police force of only about 7,000 to deal with what may be a very serious situation? Is he aware that he bears a very heavy responsibility indeed for seeing that all possible steps are taken to ensure, in the event of a breakdown of law and order, that this can be prevented?

Mr. Callaghan

Yes, I am fully aware and quite capable of bearing that responsibility, and I will not shirk it. The estimates we have are that the crowd is not likely to approach anything like 100,000. Indeed, the divisions between the organisers and the difficulty they are having in reconciling the slogans they shall display may mean that there will be a number of abstainers who otherwise might have been present. I see, for example, that the President of the National Union of Students has put out a statement advising its members to stay away.

Mr. Carlisle

Is the Home Secretary satisfied that the route to be taken is a route which will enable the police to avoid damage to private property on the sides of the route?

Mr. Callaghan

I do not think that there is any route which could be taken inside the West End or the City which would avoid damage to private property by those taking part if they were mindful to do it, but the Commissioner is satisfied that this is the best route for the demonstration.

Sir Ian Orr-Ewing

If 7,000 police are mobilised for this purpose, are the outer suburbs—which are represented by many of us, including myself—to be left devoid of protection and therefore encouraging the lawless on that day? Is not the best advice we could give to all our constituents on this occasion to stay away so that the image of our nation which is given to the rest of the world is of an orderly and tolerant one and not one which this small minority wants to impose, which would be very bad for Britain's image?

Mr. Callaghan

As the figure of 7,000 has now been twice quoted, I should say that because I have not denied it does not mean that I accept it. I would prefer not to state the number of police who will be on duty on this occasion, but I assure the hon. Member and his constituents that the same thought already occurred to the Commissioner, who will make adequate arrangements to ensure that his constituents are looked after.

Mr. Biggs-Davison

Contrary to what the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) said, is there not much literature being circulated by the organisations behind these marches which is extremely provocative of violence? Is this being looked into? Nevertheless, have not the police in the past shown some other countries an example of how to preserve both law and order and free speech? Will the Home Secretary assure them of our confidence and also of our sympathy?

Mr. Callaghan

I have no doubt from the instructions that have gone out from the Commissioner and from his senior officers right down to the ranks that a great deal of care has been taken over this matter and that the police will respond to the demonstration in a non-provocative manner. I am quite confident that the police themselves will not be provoked. It is true that a number of extremely inflammatory and violent leaflets have been put around—not, I think, by the organisers of the demonstration, but by others who perhaps have little or no following in what they are purporting to say and do.