§ 3.10 p.m.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper. Perhaps I could draw the attention of the House to the fact that "brought" in the second line should read "bought".
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government when the Home Office were instructed to sell off equipment brought for civil defence or the auxiliary fire service, how much was realised from the sales and how this sum compares with the cost of replacing this equipment.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)My Lords, in 1968 when the Government decided to put home defence on a care and maintenance basis and to disband the civil defence corps and auxiliary fire service it was agreed that equipment surplus to requirements should be sold. In 1971 Ministers directed that remaining equipment which was no longer cost-effective to retain should be disposed of. Total receipts from scrap and surplus materials since 1968 exceed £5 million. No useful purpose would be served by comparing this sum with the cost of replacing the equipment, as much of it was unserviceable, obsolescent or of a kind no longer necessary to stockpile.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that shortly after the Labour Government decided to disband civil defence the Soviet Union took steps in exactly the opposite direction and has continued to expand its civil defence, particularly since 1972? Is he also aware that the USSR believes that it can reduce deaths and casualties by at least 75 per cent. by the steps it has taken? Why, when the whole of Western Europe is taking measures, are we lagging so far behind, both in our plans and in our resolution?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, my noble friend may be aware that Her Majesty's Government participate fully in the work of the NATO Civil Defence Committee, in which these matters are kept under regular review. But I must say to my noble friend that it is because the Government take very seriously indeed what my noble friend has just said that several months ago they instituted a wide-ranging review of civil defence; my right honourable friend the Home Secretary hopes to be able to report to Parliament soon after Easter.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, can the noble Lord say whether there is any record of the people in the other place or in your Lordships' House being informed of the Government's decision in 1968? Is there any information furnished at all about this deplorable act?
§ Lord BELSTEADNo, my Lords, I have not looked back at previous State- 1341 ments which were made since 1968. I am answering the Question which is being put to me now.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that this was a remarkable and deplorable thing to have done without the House being informed about it?
§ Lord DUNCAN-SANDYSMy Lords, is the Minister aware that many people feel that insufficient attention is being given to civil defence? Can we be assured that the Government recognise that the effectiveness of civil defence is a most important factor which a potential aggressor will take into account in assessing the credibility of Western defence?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I agree with what my noble friend has said. May I just say to the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, that, when the care and maintenance basis decision was taken in 1968, it was announced, as I understand it, by the Prime Minister of the day in another place.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that a debate is to take place next week on the subject of civil defence—a very important debate? By that time could the noble Lord gain some information about what actually happened in 1968?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, mercifully I was not responsible in that year.
§ The Earl of KIMBERLEYMy Lords, can my noble friend say whether the report which his right honourable friend is going to get out will appear before we have the debate next week in your Lordships' House?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, when I replied to my noble friend Lord Orr-Ewing, I said that my right honourable friend hoped to be in a position to make an announcement to Parliament soon after Easter.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, can my noble friend say whether or not the widespread leakages in the Press last week about what the Government decision was in this respect are correct? Perhaps we 1342 could have a Statement before our debate so that we can base our discussion and our debate upon the points contained in that Press release. Can my noble friend say whether all the radionic equipment was sold at that time in the early 1970s, or whether there are enough radionic measuring sets to man up the posts which still continue under the care and maintenance basis?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, stocks of operational radiac equipment for detecting and measuring radioactivity are currently held in the Home Office stores for issue in an emergency, and indeed they are retained and maintained in serviceable order. I do not want to be unhelpful to the House but perhaps it would be for the convenience of noble Lords if I drew their attention to the fact that my honourable friend the Minister of State answered an Adjournment debate in another place on the 20th of this month. I do not think that I should be able to add to anything that my honourable friend said, but I will do my best when your Lordships debate this vital subject next Wednesday.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, will the noble Lord not heed what I think is the view of all parts of the House, that a Statement should be made—a positive Statement—before the debate?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I shall be ready on Wednesday of next week to make a positive statement. Before then, no.