HC Deb 22 June 1972 vol 839 cc700-3
22. Mr. Hattersley

asked the Minister of State for Defence to what extent the principles set out in the manual "Low Intensity Operations" by Brigadier Frank Kitson are the basis for part of the syllabus taught at the School of Infantry at Warminster.

Lord Balniel

The syllabus of the School of Infantry naturally reflects the experience gained by the Army in past operations, of which there have been many in the internal security and counter-insurgency rôle. Brigadier Kitson's book is an expression of his personal views.

Mr. Hattersley

Will the Minister of State accept from me that some of us take passages in this book very seriously indeed—certainly more seriously than chance and foolish interviews given to newspapers on one occasion? May I refer him specifically to page 187 of the book which deals in terms with attitudes towards industrial disputes in Great Britain and suggests that the Armed Forces should keep on their strength personnel who could play a part in industrial disputes?

Will the Minister take it from me that such a suggestion is greeted with abhorrence not only by my right hon. and hon. Friends but by all people in this country who preserve and cherish our liberties? Will he make it clear that, irrespective of Brigadier Kitson's new position and irrespective of the support and tacit agreement given to his book by the foreword and by the relationship between the royalties and the Treasury, the Government disown and dissociate themselves from the contentious paragraphs which are therein included?

Lord Balniel

As I have explained, the book is an expression of personal views. It is widely felt, I think, that Brigadier Kitson's book is a valuable contribution to informed discussion on the subject. In view of the wide interest which has been aroused in the House, I began reading the book over the weekend but I have not yet reached the page to which the hon. Gentleman refers.

Mr. Hattersley

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept from me that I regard it as a grave discourtesy to the House that a book which was published in November and which has been the subject of Questions on the Order Paper for the last month has not yet been read by the responsible Minister? Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman take it from me, since he has not read the book, that on page 187 two propositions occur. The first is that the paragraphs on that page refer specifically to Great Britain. The second is that the paragraphs on that page say that operatives who are capable of working on the docks or the railways or in other industrial disputes should be retained by the Army for purposes tantamount to strike-breaking. Will the right hon. Gentleman specifically disown that point of view?

Lord Balniel

The hon. Gentleman is very easily insulted. In view of the Questions, I thought it was a courtesy to read the book; I merely expressed the view that I had not completed reading it.

Sir Harmar Nicholls

If the suggestion made by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) that the Army should be affiliated to the TUC were adopted, would it not be vital that those in the Army should make political speeches and statements?

Lord Balniel

That is one of the arguments which I am sure the hon. Member for Walton will bear carefully in mind before he pursues that suggestion.

23. Mr. John Morris

asked the Minister of State for Defence what instructions have been given to the British Army regarding subversion in parts of the United Kingdom other than Northern Ireland.

Lord Balniel

None, Sir. This is not primarily the Army's responsibility but the Army, of course, is prepared to deal with threats, including subversion, against itself and its establishments, and the necessary instructions exist for this.

Mr. Morris

In view of certain phrases in the manual to the effect that fighting subversion may therefore be right on some occasions in the same way as fostering it might be right on other occasions, and that the Army should be capable of carrying out either function, will the Minister tell us, in view of his confession that he has not read the book, who gave approval for the book to be published and at what political level in the Department the book was looked at before last weekend?

Lord Balniel

Are we to understand that both the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friend have read the book, or are texts being extracted by Transport House for their assistance? As I have explained, the book was written by an officer who is experienced in counter-insurgency and it is regarded as being of valuable assistance to troops who will have to operate in that field in such an operation.

Mr. Ian Lloyd

Since civil and industrial disruption is undoubtedly one of the most effective weapons being used in the modern industrial state, and since courses on this subject are being given—or at least documents are being prepared—in some of our universities, is not the State entitled to protect itself against that disruption?

Lord Balniel

Yes. My hon. Friend will appreciate that no one departmental Minister is responsible for all the aspects covered in the Question. The Home Secretary has a major interest in his responsibility through the security service and the police.

Mr. Hugh Jenkins

As the small professional army to which we are aspiring no longer has its former full rôle overseas, is there not a danger that the Army may turn its thinking inwards and is there not some evidence to this effect? It is a serious question. Will not the Minister look again at the position of the small professional Army and consider whether we should not be better served in present circumstances by the establishment of a citizens' army?

Lord Balniel

I assume that the hon. Gentleman means conscription, in which case the answer is "No".