British Civil Defence Policy in Response to the Threat of Nuclear Attack 1972 – 1986 Jacquelyn Arnold A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of London Metropolitan University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2014 Contents Abstract 4 Chapter 1 Introduction 7 1.1 A Definition of Civil Defence 8 1.2 Methodology 9 1.3 Research Questions 13 1.4 Originality 19 1.5 Literature Review 20 1.6 Chapter Discussions 46 Chapter 2 The Historical Context 49 2.1 The Genesis of Modern Civil Defence Policy 52 2.2 Post -World War Two Civil Defence Policy 55 2.3 The Strath Report 63 2.4 The Sandys Defence White Paper 74 2.5 Local Authority Dissent and the Anti-Nuclear Movement 80 2.6 Home Defence Reviews of the 1960s 84 2.7 The Dissolution of Civil Defence 98 2.8 Conclusion 109 Chapter 3 Economic Influences 114 3.1 The Revival of Civil Defence 116 3.2 The 1979 Review of Civil Preparedness 125 3.3 Civil Protection and Military Spending 140 3.4 Local Authority Responsibilities and the 1983 Civil Defence Regulations 150 3.5 Conclusion 160 2 Chapter 4 Ideological Influences 163 4.1 Civil Defence and Nuclear Deterrence 165 4.2 Civil Defence and Ideology in the Labour Party 171 4.3 Civil Defence and Ideology in the Conservative Party 182 4.4 Protect & Survive 189 4.5 Conclusion 204 Chapter 5 External Influences 210 5.1 International Relations and Détente 212 5.2 Local Authority Dissent 227 5.3 Hard Rock 244 5.4 The Scientific Advisory Branch 258 5.5 Peace Groups and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament 262 5.6 Conclusion 271 Chapter 6 Conclusion 276 Appendices 294 A The H-Bomb 295 Civil Defence – Is It Any Use In The Nuclear Age? Civil Defence Today B Advising the Householder on Protection Against Nuclear Attack 298 C Civil Defence: why we need it 299 D Domestic Nuclear Shelters 300 E Protect and Survive 301 F Protect and Survive by Peter Kennard 302 Meet Mr Bomb Bibliography 304 3 Abstract 4 This thesis investigates how successive British governments in the last two decades of the Cold War developed and adapted civil defence policies aimed at mitigating the effects of a nuclear attack on the population of Britain. It tests the hypothesis that civil defence in Britain from 1972 until 1986 was shaped by three distinct influences; economic, ideological and external. It establishes in which ways and to what extent policy was shaped by these factors and which, if any, was the primary determinant of the major policy decisions of the time. It explains how changing economic, ideological and external contexts fused those policies with the political framework during those 15 years. It examines the theory and reality of civil defence, from its rebirth as a political and practical concern in 1972 until the end of civil defence as a practical and political response against a specific nuclear threat in 1986. It does so within the framework of a wider Cold War defence policy and explains how policy assumptions were constituted and perpetuated. By extrapolating and further analysing the idea of policy development as a direct result of certain key factors, this thesis charts the conceptualisation and evolution of civil defence through its fluctuating humanitarian, political, insurance and deterrent functions by which such policy may be explained and understood. The thesis concludes that determining one dominant influence from within the intensely symbiotic relationship of ideology, economics and external affairs is problematic. Rather it can be seen that the initiation of civil defence policy was the aspect of the policy cycle most closely influenced by ideology. The later formulation and implementation of that policy was primarily determined by the 5 economic resources available. The ultimate existence of civil defence in its manifestation as protection against nuclear attack was wholly a reaction to the shifting developments of international affairs. 6 Chapter 1 Introduction 7 A Definition of Civil Defence For the purpose of this thesis, ‘civil defence’ will be used as defined in the 1948 Civil Defence Act (the prevailing legislation from 1972 to 1986), to mean: ...any measures not amounting to actual combat for affording defence against any form of hostile attack by a foreign power or for depriving any form of attack by a foreign power of the whole or part of its effect, whether the measures are taken before, at or after the time of the attack.1 This differs from ‘home defence’ which is a broader term used more widely during World War Two as it explicitly embraces circumstances where the use of coercive measures or military force are also related to matters of internal hostile threat or attack; for example, the use of the Home Guard2. However these terms are often used in policy discussion without very much distinction. The interchangeability in official documentation is illustrated by the then Co-ordinator of Voluntary Effort in Civil Defence, Sir Leslie Mavor, in an article in an internally circulated journal in 1982: Don't be thrown by my recurrent references to 'civil' defence. For all practical purposes, 'home' and 'civil' defence mean the same, but I use the latter form in deference to the Home Secretary's wishes.3 Despite Sir Leslie's assertions, the distinction between the two will be observed within this thesis for the purpose of clarity. 1 Civil Defence Act 1948 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/5/contents (accessed 29 November 2007) 2 MacKenzie, S.P. (1995) p.17 3 Mavor, L. (1982) p.31 8 Methodology This thesis adopts a qualitative case study methodology with a linear research design, focussing on one primary area of data collection, document and archival analysis, and one secondary area, expert interviews. The emphasis on qualitative methodology lies with the securing of content and process in context, archival research lent itself very well to the narrow, in depth focus of the study. The research process is based on a broadly linear model, divided into five main stages: theory specification, data specification and methodology construction, data collection (archival), data collection (interviews) and data analysis. The methodology based on the analysis of documentary and archival sources with selected interviews was adopted as it offered the best opportunity for the development of new studies and modern interpretations of existing events. Rodney Lowe notes three advantages of using public records for research.4 Firstly, such records contain the broadest range of information upon which civil defence policy was made. Secondly, the genesis of policy and its eventual execution can be traced through the large amounts of documentation produced by the ‘lower levels’ of government and therefore is able to trace the decision making process and the eventual implementation of policy through the various stages of acknowledgement, discussion and refinement. Thirdly, it is possible to find previously unavailable views of ministers and other government officials by means of sifting through the 4 Lowe (1997) pp.241-2 9 large volumes of departmental records. So in conclusion, as Burnham et al. states,5 there is a great deal of evidence that the use of public records in national and regional archives can make a substantial contribution towards the understanding of the complicated policy making process of modern government. The research is predominantly archival but utilises interviews with experts in aspects of civil defence policy in order to provide complementary data to strengthen and round findings and ensure that analysis can be cross checked against sources and methodology. This is, as Bryman notes, consistent with the standard of triangulation which entails using more than one method or source of data.6 A loosely-structured interview technique was used, combining a number of open- ended standardised questions followed by a period of free discussion, leaving open the possibility of an exploratory conversation around the themes rather than demanding answers which fit a particular format or structure. As Rubin and Rubin (1995) note, “Qualitative interviewing requires listening carefully enough to hear the meanings, interpretations and understandings that give shape to the worlds of the interviewees”7. Used in conjunction with the analysis of records in the public domain in order to fill in the gaps and reveal what may not have been noted in official documents, the data collected from one to one interviewing offers the potential for personal interpretations of events and insight into thought processes and the thinking behind particular conclusions. 5 Burnham et al. (2004) p.177 6 Bryman (2001) p.274 7 Rubin & Rubin (1995) p.7 10 The interviewees were chosen for their ability to represent the widest possible range of civil defence knowledge. Bruce Kent is a political activist and the former Chair of War on Want and the International Peace Bureau. From 1980 to 1990 he served as the General Secretary and later Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). He remains Vice-President of CND and an active campaigner on peace issues. John Preston is Professor of Education at the University of East London. His research explores the relationship between security and ‘disaster education’ and how disasters can be seen to be pedagogical events which involve learning and evolve through public reaction and participation. He is the author of Disaster Education (2010) and Protect and Survive: ‘whiteness’ and the middle‐class family in civil defence pedagogies in the Journal of Education Policy (vol. 23, issue 5, 2008). Dr Robin Woolven served as an Intelligence Officer with the Security Service 1980–97. His 2002 Ph.D. in War Studies from King’s College London was titled Civil defence in London 1935-1945: the formation and implementation of the policy for, and the performance of, the A.R.P.