HC Deb 22 May 1969 vol 784 cc816-26

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Dr. Miller.]

11.52 p.m.

Mr. James Scott-Hopkins (Derbyshire, West)

This is a short debate in which to cover a very important subject. I emphasise that I wish to do nothing and say nothing which will do any harm to the Gurkha Brigade or its future. What I hope to do is strengthen the intention to hold the Brigade and maintain it and ensure that it plays a significant rôle in the future defence of our country and of the free world.

The background to the debate can be described in three parts. First, there is the appalling shortage in the strength and recruitment of the British Army. We are 10,000 men short—there is no denying that. Secondly, there is the intention of the Secretary of State for Defence to change the basis of recruitment of British officers to the Gurkha Brigade from that of regular officers who join the Brigade and stay with it as a career to a system of short-service officers going to the Brigade for a limited time or of officers transferred for a short period from the Regular Army to the Brigade. Coupled with this is his intention to cut down the strength of the Brigade from 10,000 to 6,000 men.

Thirdly, there are the views reported in the Sunday Telegraph on 18th May as having been expressed by the Prime Minister of Nepal. There is no confirmation of the report and I suggest that several parts of it are quite exaggerated. A certain disquiet is expressed by His Excellency the Prime Minister about the sons of Nepal serving foreign powers overseas. I was glad to see in this report by the Sunday Telegraph reporter that the Prime Minister had every intention of honouring the treaties and agreements between our two countries, and that there will be no change in the near future.

I have tried to find out from the Library under what treaties we have the right and ability to recruit Gurkhas, but I have been unable to do so. All I can find is a statement made in 1948 by Lord Alexander, as he now is, the Minister of Defence in the 1955–60 Tory Government.

The future of the Brigade must be viewed in the context of what the Government are saying about withdrawing from east of Suez and from the Far East in 1971. I gather it is intended that the Gurkhas should stay in Hong Kong. Whether the intention is to keep the whole of the reduced Gurkha Brigade there I do not know, but a fair proportion will be in that area. The Government intend to keep a presence in the Far East under our obligations to be available should the necessity arise.

What is the rôle of the Gurkhas? They will certainly be in Hong Kong, but of itself that does not justify the keeping on of the Gurkha Brigade. I had the honour to serve with the Gurkha Brigade during the war and after, and I know what splendid men they are. Few would disagree that they are among the finest fighting men in the world today.

The Gurkha can adapt himself to any condition—mountain, plain, heat, cold, mud, dust. This was shown in the First World War and the last war and in the various encounters since, in Malaysia, and in the confrontation in Indonesia, and so on. He is an extremely brave man who can endure enormous hardship, and his humour and courage are an absolute by-word wherever soldiers are. Last but not least is his loyalty, to his own country, to the British Crown, to his officers and to his regiment. This is something which is perhaps lacking in the national life of this country at the moment.

Surely, if a rôle can be found for him, in addition to Hong Kong, it would be foolish not to employ him. I believe that there is a great deal that could be done by the Gurkha Brigade. Gurkhas are still welcome in Malaysia and in Kuala Lumpur where the base camp is. This is in the short term.

In the future I hope that the Brigade will be based partly in Australia, not necessarily as part of the Australian defence forces, but working in close co-operation with them and with our own maritime forces in those waters. These maritime forces will undoubtedly be strengthened when a Conservative Government returns to power. There is also the possibility, as happened a year or two ago, of a battalion spending time as part of our strategic reserve at home. Perhaps a company might even become part of the S.A.S. Why not? It would not be possible to find a better soldier to carry out the duties which the men of the S.A.S. are asked to perform.

It is possible to think of an enormous number of rôles which the Gurkha can play, if he is allowed to serve west of Suez, and provided the Government negotiate with Nepal and with Australasia.

There are three problems. The first is, do we intend to maintain a sufficient force of Gurkhas? I do not think that we do. Simply cutting the Brigade from 10,000 to 6,000 is a great mistake, and the Under-Secretary of State knows my views about it. At any one time, a quarter of the strength of the Brigade will be on leave. Nepal is a long way from Katmandu, and the normal leave period is one of six months to justify the long journey from Katmandu to the hills of Nepal. At any one time, there will be far fewer than 6,000 troops serving in the Brigade.

In any event, we shall be cutting down on a great many of the ancillary services because, if there is to be a cut from 10,000 to 6,000, not only will the fighting strength be cut but, presumably, the technical units which support it. It means that there will no longer be a group which is able to go into action as a combative whole at any one time.

The second problem concerns British officers. The Under-Secretary of State was good enough to write to me explaining his ideas about reducing the permanent cadre of regular officers. I regret this, but I accept that it is necessary if the strength is to be reduced to 6,000. The cadre would be too small to provide a reasonable career structure to a regular officer joining it, and therefore the Brigade will have short-service commissioned officers or officers who have been transferred.

However, I must warn the hon. Gentleman of the difficulties which lie ahead. It takes months to learn the language. I am fairly good at picking up languages, but it took me a long time to learn Khaskura. It must be learned for an officer to be able to command troops in the field and if there is to be confidence between him and his men.

In addition, it takes time to acclimatise oneself not only to the heat and cold but to the customs and habits of the Gurkhas, splendid people though they are. It is wrong to think that the future will be easy, but I accept that the Government's decision is necessary given a force of 6,000 men. However, that is perhaps yet another argument for keeping the strength up to 10,000-plus. In that event, it would be possible to provide regular officers with a reasonable career structure. In my view, it is essential to have long-service officers serving in the Brigade. The senior majors and colonels should have served a long time with Gurkha troops so that the men will come to know, trust and love them.

I turn finally to what is perhaps the most difficult problem of all, and here I refer to the attitude and feelings of the Nepalese Government. After all, it is their decision, which is final, as to whether or not we have a Gurkha Brigade and have 10,000, 6,000, 2,000 or 1,000 men in the Brigade in the future. That is why I was glad to read that the Prime Minister of Nepal confirmed his intention to honour existing treaties and agreements with this country. We have had treaties of friendship with Nepal for over 200 years, and we have been recruiting her sons for over 100 years.

It must not be forgotten, however, that it is not the British Army which is recruiting most of the Gurkhas today. The Indians recruit many more. We have four battalions, whereas the Indian Army has something like 40, together with ancillary troops. My own regiment was handed over to the Indian Army and today is serving it honourably.

It is unthinkable that anything should occur which might break the treaties between the two countries. But I can understand the misgivings of the Nepalese Government. Naturally there are anxieties when a great many of Nepal's sons serve in any foreign army in an alien land. But India is taking most of them, and not us.

Again, it has not helped matters that there has been so much chopping and changing of policies. What do the Gurkhas and the Nepalese Government see but chop, chop, chop all the time? They see the British Government drawing out of the Far and Middle East and not honouring its treaty obligations in those areas. What a tragedy it all is. I hope that when we are returned to power after the next election—and I can only hope that that will be soon enough for our friends—these good friends of ours will listen to what we are saying. I only hope that in the meantime they will not be panicked by anything which this Government says, but rather that they will retain their friendship with this country and believe that when we are returned we shall honour our obligations in the Far East and maintain in that area something which is meaningful.

Over and above that, we have said that we shall recruit up to 10,000 Gurkha troops, for we can do with every single friend we have got at this moment of time. I hope that we shall be able to negotiate with the Australian Government and the Nepalese Government in a tripartite way, for we want the Gurkha soldier who has been our friend for so many years. It would be an awful tragedy if this friendship came to an end and this long friendship with the British Army was prematurely finished.

I do plead with the Government to change their mind and to move towards the kind of policy which I believe we shall introduce when we return to power, for it is so important not only for this country but for the Near and Far East. This is what is needed. The Gurkhas have an enormous part to play in the defence of this free part of the world.

12.8 a.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army (Mr. James Boyden)

I appreciate the interest of the hon. Member for Derbyshire, West (Mr. Scott-Hopkins) in the Gurkha Brigade, and also his record with it. I join in the tribute he paid in praising the quality of the Gurkha soldiers. The Government fully appreciates the splendid military characteristics of the Gurkhas and their record of loyal service to this country over the last 150 years as part of the Indian Army until 1947, and since then as part of the British Army. They have proved their courage and loyalty in both world wars, and in many other campaigns all over the world. Theirs is a record of which we and they can be proud.

Proposals to reduce the strength of the Brigade of Gurkhas were made in 1963, when the Brigade had a strength of about 14,600 men, and the then Government—a Government of the hon. Gentleman opposite—announced their intention to reduce the Brigade to 10,000 men. The basic point is that the Gurkhas could not be exempted from the reductions being made in the strength of the Army generally, and in 1963 the then Conservative Government announced their intention.

However, due to the confrontation campaign in Borneo, it was not until 1967, when the confrontation had ended, that we were able to put into effect what were, in fact, plans formulated by right hon. Gentlemen opposite. In other words, what we did in 1967 was to carry out the declared policy of our predecessors, and perhaps I might say here that it would appear that on this point at least, we and hon. Members opposite, are in agreement. I think that most hon. Members opposite are not in agreement with the hon. Gentleman, but the fact is that we put the plans into effect, and the Brigade will be at a strength of 10,000 men at the end of this year.

As the House knows, we re-examined our defences at the end of 1967 in the light of the imperative need to make further savings and decided to withdraw our forces from east of Suez, except Hong Kong, by the end of 1971, a decision which the hon. Gentleman deplores.

This decision led us to make further economies by reducing our forces in line with the reduction of our military commitments. As my right hon. Friend announced on 16th January, 1968, a part of the reductions in the Army has to be borne by the Brigade of Gurkhas, which is to be reduced to a strength of 6,000 men by the end of 1971. The Brigade will then consist of four battalions, one from each of the four regiments of Gurkha Rifles with their associated headquarters and supporting arms and services, as the hon. Member knows.

This force will be based in Hong Kong as part of our continuing garrison in the Colony. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Gurkha units played a good part in the preservation of law and order during disturbances in Hong Kong in 1967. I was able fairly recently to meet a considerable number of Gurkhas in Hong Kong and I talked to them about the part they had played in the riots and disturbances, about their future and other matters.

One cannot fail to be impressed by their cheerfulness and, although one does not see their courage exhibited in that sort of visit, one knows about their courage and general extremely good military qualities. I had a very interesting session at the jungle warfare school just outside Singapore.

When my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made his announcement, he also stated that the future of the Brigade after 1971 would depend on conditions at that time. I should like to make it clear that that is still the position. We have made no decision about the Brigade of Gurkhas after 1971 and we do not expect to decide in the near future.

Mr. Scott-Hopkins

Does that not make things even more uncertain? Will not the hon. Gentleman say that while he may have no plans for increasing the Brigade, at least it will stay as it is?

Mr. Boyden

I think that my statement is reasonably clear: we have not reached a decision. We have made the position up to 1971 clear and that is where we now are; there is no advance on that. There is no need for a decision yet and it would be premature to come to a decision at this moment.

The hon. Member referred to statements which have appeared in a newspaper. As I told the House recently, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence for Administration has been three times to Nepal to discuss Gurkha affairs with the Government there and has discussed matters which were relevant to the Brigade and the welfare of the Gurkhas and, of course, our own Government. As a result of my right hon. Friend's visit, I can assure the House that the Government of Nepal is fully aware of our plans for the Gurkhas and is satisfied with our methods of reduction. On day to day affairs our Ambassador in Kathmandu and the Major-General, Brigade of Gurkhas, keep in close touch with the Nepal Government about the welfare of Gurkhas.

I should like to make it clear that reductions in the Brigade are causing no hardship to the Gurkhas themselves or to Nepal. We decided that the reduction should be at the rate of 2,000 a year, which is well within the ability of the economy of Nepal to accept, and the Gurkhas made redundant are receiving compensation with which they are well satisfied. I was assured of this by personal contact when I was in Hong Kong.

All Gurkhas returning to Nepal are given resettlement training on their discharge and that helps them to return to civilian life. In addition, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development is establishing training schemes which will give more advanced training to many from among the retired Gurkha soldiers. Thus there is the Army resettlement scheme, which is being developed and improved all the time and which my right hon. Friend has seen fairly recently, and the Ministry of Overseas Development schemes being developed for some servicemen. They are both helpful to the general economy.

In the meantime, we are continuing to recruit to maintain the strength of the brigade at 6,000 and recruits are coming forward as they have always done. We recruit Gurkhas under the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement of 1947 and its associated documents, which govern the recruitment and terms of service of the Gurkhas. These continue to work satisfactorily. No suggestion has ever been made to the Government that the Nepalese wish to terminate or to alter the agreement. Either side can open negotiations to alter it, but no representations have been made to the Government about that and the 1947 Agreement still stands.

One argument which has often been used is that the cost of the Gurkha troops compares favourably with that of British troops, although the hon. Member did not raise that point and he obviously does not wish to press it. One needs to consider all the facts involved. Having Gurkhas in Hong Kong is cheaper to the British Exchequer than having United Kingdom troops there, but if Gurkha troops were to be used in other areas the cost would move very much in the same direction as in the case of British soldiers. A Gurkha battalion in Europe or in Britain would cost slightly more than a British battalion. I do not press that comparison, but I state the point because sometimes it is distorted.

There is a political difficulty, with which Mr. Profumo dealt in 1963, which is always present—the fact that Gurkha troops are not completely ubiquitous as are British troops. There are certain parts of the world where, for social or religious reasons, we should wish to use British rather than Gurkha troops in certain instances, and that is a limiting political and military factor in their employment.

I have been asked about the size of the brigade. Our policy is to concentrate the brigade in Hong Kong so that we have the benefit of Gurkhas being nearer Nepal and also being engaged in their most useful deployment in the situation which exists in Hong Kong. We plan to keep about 6,000 there. If we had more, it would exceed the requirement of the Hong Kong garrison, and we have no requirement at the moment for keeping more than that number in Hong Kong.

The hon. Member suggested that because recruiting is not as good as we wish it to be, that is an argument for increasing the number of Gurkha troops. It is true, as I admitted in the Estimates debate, that recruiting has been disappointing, but we do not expect that situation to continue. The optimistic forecasts which I made fairly recently, and which were perhaps rather scorned by the hon. Member, appear to be coming true. In the last few weeks we have improved nearly all our recruiting, and we hope that further steps in the near future will bring it back to a satisfactory level. I know that the hon. Member hopes that that will be so even though he has to make political speeches on the subject.

I was asked about officer recruiting, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for what he said about my writing to him on the subject. We both understand that a very small number of regular officers will be required for this purpose in the future. By the end of the year three young officers from Sandhurst will be the last Regular young officers to go on a permanent basis to the Brigade of Gurkhas in Hong Kong. As the hon. Member said, it is a narrow career now, with geographical and operational limitations, and therefore we think it right—I think he agrees—that we should cease to commission British Regular officers into the permanent cadre of the brigade after the end of this year.

Those who are already there will continue to serve there and have the option of staying on with the Brigade or volunteering to join an infantry division in Britain or wherever the British Army is situated. After this year we shall commission only short service British officers into the permanent cadre. That is the same basis as the Corps which support the Rifle Regiments of the Brigade of Gurkhas. As I said in answer to a Question, this has been satisfactory in the past.

The Engineers, the Signals and the Transport Regiment of the Gurkhas are all officered by seconded and short service officers, and this has worked very well. I am sure that the new arrangements will also work well. There will be a considerable amount of opportunity for officers to exercise their own discretion and widen their experience. We believe that this will all work out to the good.

I hope that I have been able to reassure the hon. Member for Derbyshire, West on a number of his points. I cannot accept his general political case, either that his Party will be in a position to do anything about this matter for a considerable time, or the general implications of the political and military situation.

On the more narrow points of the Brigade of Gurkhas, I hope that I have been able to give him a little encouragement that we are doing all we can with the existing situation. As far as I know from personal observation and from the reports which I receive, the Brigade is very contented and the Gurkhas continue to give the excellent service which they have given to the British Government for a long time. They continue to do so in reasonable comfort and with excellent morale.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-one minutes past Twelve o'clock.