Military Installations (Security) (Hansard, 24 July 1984)

§ 1. Mr. Greenway
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he is satisfied with the security of the Greenham common site and other military installations; and if he will make a statement.

§ 8. Mr. Flannery
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he is satisfied with the security situation at Greenham common air base; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. John Stanley)
Security at all military installations is under constant review. The high security areas within defence establishments, including that at RAF Greenham common, are very comprehensively protected.

§ Mr. Greenway
How were two women able to live undetected inside the perimeter fence for almost a week recently? Why do the police seem to stand by while so-called peace women cut the chain link fencing and thereby gain access to the base, putting the defence of Britain last and their own eccentric behaviour first?

§ Mr. Stanley
The evidence on the ground does not substantiate the claims of the ladies in question that they spent a week in that particular place. A distinction needs to be drawn between the protection of outer perimeters and of the high security areas. Although we divert as much as we reasonably can by way of finance and manpower to the protection of the outer perimeter fences, I am sure my hon. Friend will understand that the key issue at Greenham common is the proper protection of the high security area, and, as I said, that has been comprehensively protected.

§ Mr. Flannery
Does the Minister realise that the security of our entire nation, never mind Greenham common air base, is at stake, that these horrific weapons are a menace to everybody, and that the majority of British people want to be rid of them? Does he further realise that his viewpoint on this matter is even worse than the security at Greenham common? The right hon. Gentleman has not yet realised just how deeply the British people feel about these horrific weapons.

§ Mr. Stanley
I do not know which general election the hon. Gentleman fought last year, but it does not seem to have been the one that was fought by my right hon. and hon. Friends, when the British people gave a decisive mandate in favour of the Government's policies.

§ Sir Antony Buck
Will my right hon. Friend emphasise again, for the benefit of the House, the difference between the outer and inner perimeters? Will he confirm that no one has penetrated anywhere near those parts of the base which really matter?

§ Mr. Stanley
I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend. The point that he makes is correct. I can also confirm that there has been no penetration of the high security area of Greenham common.

Mr. J. Enoch Powell
Has it been made clear to the American forces, in the terms of the Secretary of State's recent written reply to me, that their powers in relation to trespassers in these bases do not exceed those of the ordinary citizen under the common law and that their liabilities correspond?

§ Mr. Stanley
As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, the responsibility for informing American service men of their obligations under United Kingdom law rests with the American commander, and I am sure that they have been fully informed of the requirements and limitations of United Kingdom legislation.

§ Mr. Viggers
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that cruise missiles will continue to be deployed on practice runs outside the base at Greenham common, thereby emphasising that Greenham common is nothing more than a bomb-proof garage and underlining the pointlessness of the protest?

§ Mr. Stanley
I can confirm that off-base training deployment will continue. That is the Government's firm policy.

§ Mr. Strang
As the missiles are currently deployed outside the base, will the Minister tell the House whether the Government are consulted in advance of the training exercises? As no live missiles are being carried, will the Minister give an assurance that the British Government would be able to veto any decision to take live missiles out of Greenham common?

§ Mr. Stanley
The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we have made it clear on many occasions that no live missiles will be deployed for training purposes. I assure him that the off-base training deployment takes place after the closest consultation and liaison with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

§ Mr. Adley
Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is an apposite word in the English language to describe those who deliberately undermine the safety and security of the nation of which they are citizens? Can he recall what it is?

§ Mr. Stanley
I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I fully take the point that he makes.

§ Mr. Denzil Davies
Is it not a fact that at the end of the day the British Government's writ does not run in Greenham common and that ultimate security and control over the firing of these missiles lie with the United States Government? Is the Minister aware that recently the chief of staff of the United States army, General Meyer, admitted in a Congressional Committee hearing that missiles can at times of tenson and emergency be fired by the theatre commander? How does that square with the Government's attempt to pretend that they have a veto over the firing of the cruise missiles?

§ Mr. Stanley
That reference to General Meyer has been made before. I have read his statement carefully, and I have found that it is not open to the construction that the right hon. Gentleman has put upon it. The United Kingdom's position is exactly as has been stated by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—that no cruise missiles in this country can be fired or launched without her consent.