Greenham Common (Hansard, 19 December 1983)

§ Mr. Roland Boyes (Houghton and Washington)

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the contingency security arrangements that the Secretary of State for Defence has made for dealing with unauthorised persons entering the Greenham common missile base, following the growing use of physical force to deal with such persons. I feel that after our discussions during the past half an hour there should be a pause for reflection.

I have raised an important matter that deals with the possible shooting of unarmed, innocent people who are campaigning on behalf of us all to end the nonsense of having cruise missiles under American control based in Britain. We see daily the growing problems of guarding the missiles. The matter illustrates the magnitude of the danger that both sides of the House appreciate, including the Secretary of State, who has had to resort to stating that he might sanction the shooting of campaigners. It is an outrage that a senior member of the Government should make such a statement.

The matter is specific because it deals with a document that has been prepared by the Secretary of State, which was quoted at length in The Observer on Sunday. To demonstrate why I seek leave to move the Adjournment of the House, I shall quote the points raised in the document, as reported in The Observer. It states that US troops might shoot British citizens once the missiles arrived. The Secretary of State has already announced that missiles have arrived, so soldiers might now shoot the women of Greenham common. Secondly, the document states: Mr. Heseltine had therefore arranged for a ring of British troops to stand between the Americans and protesters. I assure the House that the women of Greenham common will find no consolation from the bullet having been fired by a British soldier rather than an American soldier.

On 1 November I asked the Secretary of State to give the House an assurance that no shots would be fired at demonstrators, and he replied: I shall categorically give no such an assurance."—[Official Report, 1 November 1983; Vol. 46, c. 729.] The right hon. Gentleman should come before the House and say that, after reflection, he withdraws that statement.

The Home Secretary has said today that violence will not achieve its objective. Threats of violence, including threats to shoot the women of Greenham common, will not stop any of us from campaigning to rid this country of those weapons, which put us in daily danger.

The matter is urgent because of the continuing allegations of violence by the women of Greenham common and the growing intolerance of the security forces. Only two weeks ago a number of women had fingers and hands broken when they touched the wires and were beaten with sticks.

The issue of violence has been raised many times in the House by many hon. Members, including my hon. Friends the Members for Wokington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) and Knowsley, North (Mr. Kilroy-Silk). The more incidents that occur such as those two weeks ago, the lower is the threshold at which a shot is fired, and the greater the problems that we shall have to face in the House.

29 The Secretary of State should come to the House and make another statement—as I wanted him to do after I spoke on 5 December—about the security at Greenham common, the escalation of violence and the possibility of people dying. We should debate the matter so that the Secretary of State can tell us that, after due reflection, the statement that he made on 1 November was in error and unnecessarily endangered the women of Greenham common.