Oral Answers to Questions — British Army – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 17 December 1958.
asked the Secretary of State for War to what extent it is the practice in the Army to send two cars on a journey to ensure that at least one of them finally reaches the destination.
This is not the practice in the Army, save on very rare occasions where special precautions have to he taken.
Is it not rather strange that in the Grigg Report, which was not challenged and which was welcomed by the Government, this was alleged in paragraph 64? The Secretary of State does not deny that this is a fact. What is the use of appointing an important committee of inquiry unless some notice is taken of its recommendations? As far as I know, nothing has been done in this case.
The right hon. Gentleman is incorrect to say that no notice has been taken of the recommendations of the Grigg Report. This was one item in it. The Grigg Committee gave the impression that this was taking place, but I have been in some difficulty to trace any examples of double banking in this way. When it is necessary, for instance, to convey a V.I.P. over a long distance in Germany—perhaps some 300 miles—and he is to be there for a couple of days and has many appointments to fulfil and the authorities are anxious that he should be sure of keeping his appointments, and when there is a risk of breaking down on long autobahn journeys, sometimes a second car is sent. However, that is certainly not general practice in the Army; of that I can assure the right hon. Gentleman.
Will the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Grigg Committee simply instanced this as a striking example of the very grave deficiencies of equipment, of which it pointed out a list? The Secretary of State says that the War Office is taking notice of the Grigg Committee's recommendations, although in the Government's comments on the Report all they say is:
EQUIPMENT
The Government fully recognise the importance of good equipment."
That seems a very inadequate notice.
That was what was said in the White Paper which was published with the Report. We went into this in more detail and discussed a re-equipment plan for the Army. I was at pains in the debate not to deny the terms of the Grigg Report that the equipment of the Army left a great deal to be desired, but I must say that I did not deal with this specific point.