§ Sir H. Studholmeasked the Secretary of State for Defence what further representations he has received, following his study of the pamphlet, published by the Dartmoor Preservation Association, entitled "Misuse of a National Park", about the use made by his Department of Dartmoor; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. KirkA small number of representations have been received. Principally I have been challenged by the Dartmoor Preservation Association to justify my statement that its pamphlet is not an accurate statement of the case. I have also been asked if I will reaffirm my statement of 5th March, and I, therefore, welcome this opportunity to do so.
The pamphlet contains a few factual errors and misleading half truths. For example, the missiles in the photographs described as unexploded are spent and 177W harmless. It is incorrectly reported that the stones of a prehistoric kistvaen at Gutter Tor were dug up. The pamphlet states there are frequent inconsistencies between advertised and actual firing times. While it is true that sometimes for adequate military reasons firing does not take place on some days for which firing has been advertised, it has for safety reasons for some years been the practice never to fire on days which have not been advertised. The pamphlet also incorrectly says that
it had been agreed that the Services should relinquish their wartime holdings at the end of the war".Nevertheless it is not my main purpose to criticise these errors of fact in the pamphlet. I am more concerned with its manner of approach to the problem.
The pamphlet is a one-sided statement by an organisation which presses a policy of complete withdrawal from Dartmoor by the Services that the Government could only accept if, in the light of all the consequences, it could be regarded as practicable and desirable. The Dartmoor Preservation Association does not as the pamphlet claims
show a full understanding of the need for an effective national defence".As a one-sided statement it cannot be a full and objective study of the problem and I am concerned to ensure that it is not commonly regarded as such. There is, for example, no suggestion in the pamphlet that the logical result of its policy could be that the Army and the Royal Marines would have to leave Plymouth and the South-West and break a long tradition of great value to this country. The pamphlet cannot conceive that a dispassionate consideration of land-use, military deployment, and use of national resources might point to continued use of Dartmoor as both a Services' training area and a National Park. My right hon. Friend and his colleagues have frequently assessed these factors and concluded that the Services must continue to use Dartmoor for as long as they can foresee, especially in view of the increasing difficulties of obtaining suitable land for Service purposes in this country.The Moor is accessible to the public when firing is not in progress and I am anxious that the public should visit it for themselves and see whether their enjoyment 178W of it as a National Park has been significantly prejudiced by the Service use. We shall be consulting the Dartmoor National Park Committee and the Dartmoor Commoners' Association as we have always done in the past on matters affecting their interests, and I am glad to say that our relations with these bodies are most cordial.