NORTHERN IRELAND (Hansard, 25 October 1971)

§ The Minister of State for Defence (Lord Balniel)
I have received the following report. At about 4.30 a.m. on Saturday, 23rd October, soldiers of the 3rd Battalion, The Royal Green Jackets, were engaged in search operations in Cape Street in the Lower Falls area of Belfast. A Ford saloon car was driven at speed along Cape Street. As it reached the junction of Cape Street and Ross Street the rear window was broken from inside and two shots were fired from inside the car towards soldiers in Cape Street. Three soldiers returned a total of nine rounds at the car which swerved across Ross Street into the junction with Omar Street.
By the time that the soldiers could regroup to follow up, a crowd had gathered about the car, which had crashed into a wall. When the soldiers had dispersed the crowd, they found two women shot dead in the back seat. These have been identified as Mrs. Mary Ellen Meehan and Miss Dorothy Maguire.
I understand that two other persons, Mr. William Davidson and Mrs. Florence O'Riordan, have been charged with an offence under the Explosive Substances Act (Northern Ireland) in connection with this incident and were due to appear in court today.

§ Mr. Stallard
Is the Minister aware that earlier reports of this incident over the official media—television, radio, and so on—attributed a statement to an Army spokesman to the effect that these women were dressed as men, that they were guerrillas, and that, as he said, shots were 1228 fired from the van? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that photographs published since then, and statements made from the scene of this terrible tragedy, show clearly that these women were dressed in gaily coloured blouses, and that one was dressed in white slacks? In fact, they were dressed in the same style as thousands of young women in this country would dress for an ordinary evening out.

Hon. Members
With guns.

§ Mr. Stallard
Finally, is the Minister aware that statements made from the scene of this tragic incident show quite clearly that no shots were fired from the van? In view of the conflicting statements, will the Minister initiate an immediate and comprehensive inquiry into the whole incident?

§ Lord Balniel
The last point raised by the hon. Gentleman is most important. An inquiry has been held by the Special Investigation Branch of the Royal Military Police, and the military report will be available to the police if they request it.
I understand that one woman was wearing a jacket and jeans, and the other a jacket and slacks or trousers. I know that this matter has been argued in the Press, but it is irrelevant. What matters is that, according to the report, shots were fired from the car, and that was the reason for returning the fire.

§ Mr. George Thomson
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that newspaper reports of the announcement made by the Army authorities to the Press seemed to make it clear that the Army reported the facts immediately as they found them? Nevertheless, is the Minister aware that there appears to be a conflict of evidence, some of which I gather is to be dealt with in the courts. In those circumstances, will the Minister respond positively to the request of my hon. Friend that there should be the fullest possible inquiry into all the circumstances of this tragic incident?

§ Lord Balniel
I shall certainly respond positively, in that there has already been an inquiry, and the military authorities will make their report available to the police. The right hon. Gentleman is correct in saying that this matter will 1229 be coming before the courts in Northern Ireland.

§ Mr. Pounder
Can the Minister tell the House what period of time elapsed between the car's striking the wall and the Army being able to gather round and disperse the crowd?

§ Lord Balniel
I do not have the exact figure for the time that elapsed, but what was happening was that some troops were still searching the houses and it was necessary to regroup the troops. A crowd gathered, and the troops found it necessary to fire three baton rounds before they could disperse the crowd and reach the car.

§ Mr. Thorpe
In this tragic situation, are not we in the difficulty that, on the one hand, there is rampant terrorism, and on the other we are trying to maintain civil law without recourse to martial law? That being so, is it not important that there is in existence some permanent body which can immediately look into these grievances and report, from whatever quarter they come?
Is is not a fact that Sir Edmund Compton's inquiry is ad hoc for a specific purpose which will shortly be completed? In fairness to everyone, not least the Army, does not the Minister consider that there should be some form of impartial tribunal to whom appeals of this sort may be made?

§ Lord Balniel
The right hon. Gentleman referred to rampart terrorism in Northern Ireland. The disturbances over the weekend were very grave indeed. There were 54 separate incidents of shooting at troops, involving the use of automatic fire on 17 occasions. That is the greatest number during any weekend of the disturbances. The right hon. Gentleman has raised a much wider question, and we shall certainly take note of the points that he has made.

§ Mr. McManus
Further to the point which has been raised about a full inquiry. When it is held, will the Minister consider allowing it to inquire also into the terrible tragic shooting incident at Newry in which three men died? On this occasion, unlike the position on other occasions, there is no argument about whether these men were armed. It is clear that they were unarmed.
1230 Will the Minister inform the House, or confirm that soldiers are not allowed to shoot unarmed civilians, except when martial law is in force? If soldiers are operating as if martial law had been imposed, why has martial law not been declared? Will the Minister get it into his head that the minority in Northern Ireland regard the shooting of the three men at Newry as murder?

§ Lord Balniel
The hon. Gentleman has asked me about a completely different incident which took place at the weekend. The circumstances are being investigated, but the facts as I know them are that soldiers on duty on a rooftop of a house in Newry at 11.55 p.m. on Saturday, 23rd October, saw three men attack a man who appeared to be depositing money in a night safe. After giving warning, the soldiers fired shots which killed the three attackers. Until the inquiry is complete it would be wrong for me to comment further.
As to the right of a soldier to shoot, I explained the circumstances in an earlier reply to the House in May of this year.

§ Mr. Mayhew
Will the Minister say what instructions have been laid down about the level of seniority at which official statements are made by the Army following incidents of this kind?

§ Lord Balniel
Army commanders responsible for a unit are authorised to make a statement to the Press or public media specifically concerning the incident in which they are involved. Matters of policy are referred to politicians or senior officers.

§ Mr. George Thomson
On the incident in Newry, has there been any change at all in the instructions given to the British Army in terms of when they may or may not fire? Is there any truth in the allegation that there is now an instruction to fire on suspicion? Would the hon. Gentleman also remind his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and his right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, who are sitting beside him, that at the end of the day this kind of situation can be dealt with only by positive moves towards some sort of political solution?

§ Lord Balniel
The right hon. Gentleman raises a much wider question, involving political developments in 1231 Northern Ireland. I can assure him that there has been no change in the basic rules made available to the troops.

§ Mr. McNamara
On a point of order. On Friday, Mr. Speaker, I raised with you a point of order about my having telephoned the Compton Commission in Belfast about the scope of its inquiry and having been informed that it was entitled only to look into evidence concerning men arrested on 9th August and on that date only and into no other allegations of ill-treatment or cruelty. You were kind enough to say that you would consider whether this was a point of order in view of what the Home Secretary had said.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have considered the point very carefully. I am satisfied that no point of order arises.

§ Mr. Orme
On another point of order. May I not ask you and, through you, Mr. Speaker, the Home Secretary, whether or not some clarification should be given, since, as will be seen from cols. 550 and 547 of the OFFICIAL REPORT, the Home Secretary gave a categorical answer about the Compton Commission. I feel that, in the interests of all the people concerned, we should have a statement from the Home Secretary on this matter.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Member has made his point.

§ Mr. Atkinson
Further to the earlier questions about the Home Secretary, could you tell us, Mr. Speaker, whether the Home Secretary has informed you when he will be coming to the House to make a personal statement?

§ Mr. Speaker
No.
As a matter of courtesy, I would add that I do not mean that I would not answer the hon. Member's question but only that I have not been told. I am afraid that my answer may have sounded a little discourteous, but that is not what I meant. I simply mean that I have not received any intimation.