HL Deb 09 December 1975 vol 366 cc815-7

2.44 p.m.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether civil defense measures are being maintained as an assurance of reasonable security in the event of possible aggression.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government have pursued a policy whereby both central and local civil defense measures, backed by appropriate plans, facilities and communications, are maintained and kept up to date. The plans to put essential services on to a war-time footing would be implemented if it became necessary to do so.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, I am obliged to my noble friend for that Answer, but may I ask him whether he is aware that, in the absence of details, one is entitled to ask for more definite assurances of what planning has been undertaken in order to ensure that a reasonable measure of security can be effected? Is my noble friend aware of the tension that exists in almost every part of the world at the present time, and that we have to have regard to eventualities, possibilities, probabilities, in international affairs? Is he further aware that, although I do not expect the Government to indulge in excessive expenditure on civil defense at this time, at any rate we should like an assurance that plans are effective and are likely to prove adequate in time of need?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, I can quite honestly give my noble friend and your Lordships an assurance that the plans are considered by the Government to be effective. It would not be in the national interest to examine in greater detail the actual measures that are being taken, and I am sure the House would not want to press me on this, but the civil defense measures in the United Kingdom are commensurate with those of similar countries in the North Atlantic Alliance and we are working very closely with those countries. Your Lordships may know that the Home Defense College near York, which is run by the Home Office, arranges a continuous series of well-attended studies in civil defense and related peace-time emergencies, which are for senior officials from central and local government and the nationalised industries. I do not think I can take it beyond that.

Lord INGLEWOOD

My Lords, while I do not wish to press the noble Lord for further details, would he not agree that planning without training is not very effective, and could he not say something about the training other than that of senior Government officials and officials from the nationalised industries? What is the scope of the training put in hand, and roughly what numbers are involved? Otherwise, one is led to feel that this provision exists on paper but would not be very effective on the day of reckoning.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, if the noble Lord is talking about widespread training, that is not the situation at the present moment in regard to ordinary people. The important thing, as the Government see it, is to have more than a nucleus—a substantial number of people—from local and central government, as I have mentioned, and from the nationalised industries, who themselves receive training and are kept up to date so that if an emergency arises the plans can be put into operation very quickly. This is the sort of thing that we have been very good at in the past.

Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTON

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that some years ago the Chiefs of Staff advised that an attack by 13 nuclear weapons would make it impossible for this country to exist as a unified State; that we are within immediate range of no fewer than 600 Soviet medium-range missiles, and that in these circumstances civil defense arrangements have as much relevance as a fertility dance?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, what the noble Lord says may well be correct, but the fact is that, knowing the position as we do and have known it for a good number of years—and we are not unmindful of the strength of certain nations—we nevertheless have responsibility to do something to counteract the effects if such a situation should arise.

Baroness ELLES

My Lords, would the noble Lord therefore see that the defense cuts are not carried out as they are threatened at the moment?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, I will take note of what the noble Baroness says.

Lord WIGG

My Lords, if civil defense really became a necessity it would amount to a major national catastrophy. In the circumstances, is it not true that to leave the concept of civil defense in the hands of the Home Office is itself an indication of the utter absurdity of what the Minister is outlining? Very clearly, in the case of a catastrophy the matter ought to be in the hands of the Armed Forces; they should be trained and they should in fact be doing the thinking to deal with such a problem.

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, we are working on the assumption that the Armed Forces are not being trained also to help in this situation; but I will convey to my right honourable friend what the noble Lord has said.

Lord SHINWELL

My Lords, will my noble friend take note that we must disregard the possibility of nuclear aggression but have regard to the possibility of conventional aggression? In those circumstances, as in the case of military defense itself against the possibility of aggression, is my noble friend aware that many of us—at any rate, I speak for myself in this matter and I am not afraid to speak for myself—are a little concerned about the absence of knowledge which would provide the assurances which would go a long way to statisfy us; and that, therefore, an assurance from the Government that things are all right is far from satisfactory?

Lord WELLS-PESTELL

My Lords, I will convey what my noble friend has said to my right honourable friend to see whether it is possible to give more information along the lines that he has suggested.