HC Deb 26 May 1971 vol 818 cc375-80

Mr. McNamara(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of State for Defence whether he will make a statement about the nature of the orders concerning the use of firearms by Her Majesty's troops in Belfast.

The Minister of State for Defence (Lord Balniel)

Fire may be opened by troops when it is judged necessary to do so to save life or when firearms have been or appear likely to be used against the security forces or persons whom it is their duty to protect. In this context a firearm includes such weapons as grenades, petrol bombs and gelignite.

Whenever practicable an oral warning, preferably by loud hailer, is given. There are, however, circumstances in which soldiers are empowered to fire without giving an oral warning; essentially when a warning is impracticable or when any delay could lead to death or serious injury for the soldier himself or people whom it is his duty to protect.

It is of course the requirement of the common law that when acting in support of the civil power a soldier shall use no more force than is necessary for the accomplishment of his immediate task.

Mr. McNamara

May I take this opportunity, I think on behalf of the whole House, to express our sympathy to the families of the people who have been tragically killed and injured in Northern Ireland, particularly to the family of Sergeant Willet, who acted yesterday in a most courageous way?

What the right hon. Gentleman has said is very different both in tenor and in substance from what was said yesterday by the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, who seemed to be more intent on unifying his own party than in bringing help and succour to the communities there. Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that, if what the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland said was correct, he conceded victory to the Provisionals, which none of us could want, and brought encouragement to people who want to see further bloodshed in Northern Ireland? Will the right hon. Gentleman also confirm that British troops are not advised to fire warning shots?

Lord Balniel

I join in expressing sympathy to those who were hurt. In particular I pay tribute to Sergeant Willet of the 3rd Parachute Battalion, and Inspector Nurse of the R.U.C., whose brave action in shielding the by-standers and children undoubtedly saved their lives. In the case of Sergeant Willet, this was at the cost of his own life, and I offer the sincerest condolences of the whole House to his widow and relatives.

I understand that the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland has this afternoon made a clarifying statement to remove any possible ambiguities. The position of the two Governments is the same.

In answer to the third question, warning shots are not resorted to by the Army. When the Army opens fire it is at a target and is designed to kill.

Mr. George Thomson

We on this side of the House associate ourselves with the expressions of sympathy voiced by the Minister and my hon. Friend, to the widow and children of the sergeant who was killed, and join in the tributes to the superb courage shown by the sergeant.

Is the Minister aware that we join in supporting the appeal made today by the Northern Ireland Premier asking for the support of the entire community in stamping out terrorism and assuring those who give information that it will be treated in full secrecy.

Will the Minister be more explicit and tell us whether any extension has been authorised of the orders to British soldiers? Was the Northern Ireland Premier's statement yesterday in Stormont, that soldiers may fire on anyone acting suspiciously, true, or was it the kind of imprecision that is sometimes uttered by anyone in a Parliament who is under pressure at question time? Will the Minister remember that the responsibility for instruction to British troops rests firmly on Her Majesty's Government in this House, and that it is vital that Ministers should remain in control of this situation and should seek to remain in control, as was the case with my right hon. Friends when they carried these heavy responsibibilities?

Finally, will the Minister tell us what progress has been made in arresting the bomb thrower in this case and the other gunmen in similar incidents? Is he aware that this is of overriding importance in dealing with this problem?

Lord Balniel

I am sure the whole House will echo the words of the right hon. Gentleman in appealing to the people of Northern Ireland to support the Forces. To use the words of the Commander of the 3rd Parachute Battalion, the act of the terrorist almost passes comprehension.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about the right of soldiers to fire on people who are acting suspiciously. If there are strong grounds for a soldier believing that he or the people whom it is his duty to protect are in danger from a terrorist or from someone acting suspiciously, he will not wait for the terrorist to fire but will fire first.

The right hon. Gentleman asked where the responsibility lies for orders given to British troops. The responsibility, of course, rests on Her Majesty's Government in Westminster.

Captain Orr

Will my right hon. Friend answer two questions, the first one for better clarification, which everyone will agree is desirable. If a soldier on the ground saw someone whom he suspected was about to use gelignite to injure human life, would he be entitled, if there were no other option open to him, to fire and kill that person?

Secondly, does not my right hon. Friend agree that the time when a child has been injured by being blown out of a pram and when Sergeant Willet has gallantly given his life to save an innocent family is no time for mischief-making semantics about the use of words?

Lord Balniel

In the circumstances outlined by my hon. and gallant Friend, the position would be that if the soldier had no other option in stopping that form of terrorist attack he would of course have the right to fire to kill.

Mr. Stallard

Is the Minister aware that while there will be universal support for the expressions of sympathy voiced by himself and by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), there is growing concern in this country about reports of recent incidents involving the use of British troops in Northern Ireland? Is he further aware that there is a considerable body of opinion in this country, and amongst some hon. Members, that there can be no military solution to the problems of Northern Ireland? Will he therefore give urgent consideration to the constructive suggestions which have been put to him in the House and from outside the House to try to create an atmosphere in which the people who are concerned about this problem can come together and discuss a permanent political solution.

Lord Balniel

I am aware that there can be no military solution. All the military can do is create time and conditions in which an agreement can be worked out. I am not aware of the criticism which the hon. Gentleman makes about the conduct of the British troops. My impression is that overwhelmingly there is the utmost admiration for the restraint and conduct of the British troops which few armies in the world would show in these circumstances.

Mr. Chichester-Clark

I share my hon. Friend's admiration for the conduct of the British troops in Northern Ireland. May I suggest to him that he should go back with the Home Secretary and once again discuss the plans and proposals which were discussed at the time of the resignation of the former Prime Minister of Northern Ireland?

Will he also convey to his colleagues that the battle against the mad bombers and those who are purveying bullets will be aided if the British Government will show less nervousness and throw their full weight behind the conception that Northern Ireland is a State in which every grievance that can be thought of that can be eradicated by legislation has been so eradicated, and that the people who are trying to run that country are, by and large, men of good will who have proved their good will over many hard years?

Lord Balniel

I am sure that the points made by my hon. Friend, worth while and important though they are, and which are outside my departmental responsibility, have been taken note of by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department.

Miss Devlin

Will the noble Lord accept that there can be no ambiguity about the statement made yesterday by the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, particularly as he was here and had consultation with Ministers in this Government no later than last Monday and that, therefore, any disagreement between what he said and what is general Army policy cannot have arisen from confusion, but that it was on the part of the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, who has no right to speak on matters of defence, a declaration of an open season in Northern Ireland and an attempt to create an Aden or a Cyprus situation, which is no solution to the Northern Ireland problem?

Therefore, will the Minister give serious consideration to the fact that, as he accepts that there is no military solution to the problem of Northern Ireland and that the military cannot keep the peace and cannot catch one solitary bomber, he should take the Army out of Northern Ireland and that might help to secure the peace?

Lord Balniel

I am glad that the hon. Lady thinks that there was no ambiguity in the statement made yesterday by the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland. Mr. Faulkner thought that there was possibly some ambiguity and it was for that reason that he made a statement this afternoon eliminating any possibility of ambiguity. I can assure the hon. Lady that the position of the two Governments is the same. The British Army will stay in Northern Ireland as long as it is required to maintain law and order and improve the position.

Mr. Strattom Mills

Is my hon. Friend aware that all of us on this side of the House, and indeed hon. Members opposite, wish to join in the expressions of sympathy to which the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) has given voice for the people injured in the murderous bomb attack yesterday?

Will my hon. Friend consider reviewing the question whether there is a need to change any of the instructions for guarding joint R.U.C.-Army stations?

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the statement by the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland yesterday had been cleared with the security authorities before it was made? Will my hon. Friend continue, as he has done today, to resist the attempts to tie the hands of the Army in dealing with the terrorists?

Lord Balniel

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his expression of sympathy, which I know is shared by the whole House, for those who were injured. I assure my hon. Friend that the hands of the Army are in no way tied. The orders under which they operate are those which they think are necessary for the task which they have to perform.

As to the guarding of R.U.C. stations, it has been decided that shared R.U.C.-Army stations will be guarded by the Army and entrances will be covered by fire. R.U.C. stations which are not shared are being advised on how best to protect and guard themselves.