§ 2.50 p.m.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy 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 they will congratulate the Canadian Government on their decision not to make, use or distribute nuclear weapons.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, the Canadian Government's support of nonproliferation, and their decision not to produce nuclear weapons, are well-known and of long standing. The only recent Canadian decision in the context of nuclear weapons was that announced by Prime Minister Trudeau in his speech to the United Nations Special Session on Disarmament on 26th May; namely, that Canada was in process of replacing its nuclear capable aircraft in North America with conventionally-armed aircraft.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, would not the Minister agree that it is very significant that public opinion on this issue is now reaching governmental level? At the Special Session on Disarmament, not only Canada but India also announced a similar policy. Could not our Government associate themselves with this repudiation of nuclear weapons by ending not only the American bases in this country, which are an invitation to attack, but also our own nuclear weapons, which are irrelevant in view of American and Russian superiority?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I certainly agree that the more informed public opinion impresses upon Governments in all parts of the world, East and West, the desirability of, first, limiting and then, hopefully, abolishing nuclear weapons, the better it will be. Indeed, this is the theme which my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has been comprehensively and cogently advancing over the past year or so and which my right honourable friend the Prime Minister spelled out in a notable speech on 2nd June during the United Nations Special Session on Disarmament. As to the unilateral repudiation of nuclear weapons, the question is whether, in association with other nuclear Powers—I repeat in both East and West—we can evolve, as we are trying to do, a multilateral limitation leading to the abolition of these weapons, with proper provision being made for security and verification.
§ Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLSMy Lords. until we reach this Utopia, would Her Majesty's Government consider congratulating America upon the endeavours that they are making to keep ahead in the nuclear field, since it is upon that that the Western World may eventually be protected from tyranny?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not think that I could engage in a new programme of congratulation in pressing forward the existing programme of consultation.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that in the highest military circles there is an increasing trend in the direction of military strategy rather than in favour of the creation of conventional weapons—in particular the increase in manpower rather than the use of the nuclear weapon?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I think that we should all be well advised to ponder very carefully what my noble friend Lord Shinwell has said. As he has said, there is a substantial body of opinion which is beginning to consider whether—I put it no higher—there may not be a stand off, as it were, in the field of the more sophisticated and more dreadful weapons, but with the result, unless we are able to achieve agreement at all levels of armaments, that a 1123 new and intensified importance is given to what are known as conventional weapons. I am grateful to my noble friend for making that point.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, arising from that sympathetic and favourable reply, for which I am very grateful, may I ask my noble friend—
Several noble Lords: Order! Order!
§ Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYEMy Lords, could I ask the Minister—
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, perhaps my noble friend Lord Shinwell would defer to the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, it being his turn, in a bipartisan sense, to intervene at this stage.
§ Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYEMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether we are to understand that the Government endorse the dictum of Sir Winston Churchill that the possession of the atomic weapon is the great deterrent at the present time?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, it is a deterrent. It is our duty to measure the efficacy of all deterrents in present and potential future terms. We are committed, full members of NATO, with its policy of flexible deterrence. So are the Canadians; so are 15 countries, not all of them nuclear powers. While we maintain the NATO shield, we shall look carefully, with proper regard for multilateral action and verification, at other possibilities, but always on the basis of security and multilateral verification.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, in view of my noble friend's sympathetic and what I regarded as a favourable and reasonable answer to my question, may I ask whether, in view of the circumstances and the changes which I have ventured to indicate, it is desirable now to increase the number of our auxiliary forces, so far as that is possible in the economic situation, and having regard to other factors?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am glad to be regarded as reasonable by my noble friend, even if I 1124 am not always favourable. I find that what he says is, if I may say so without presumption, reasonable. He has said that we should measure our defensive efforts in relation to our economic strength. I am paraphrasing what my noble friend said, but there was that qualification in his remarks. While we are doing that, with like minded countries—not all of them in the NATO alliance; indeed, an increasing number of them in the non-aligned sector—we are seeking both in New York at the present moment, and in other for a, like Geneva and Vienna, opportunities for the multilateral reduction of not only nuclear arms but also conventional arms, leading, one hopes, to eventual abolition. I believe that that is the right basis upon which the defence policy of this country should proceed, and it is the basis upon which the whole strategy of NATO is based.
§ Lord ELTONMy Lords, if the noble Lord accepts the principle which he has rightly enunciated—that we must do the best that we can within our economic potential—will he not stress to his friends in the Ministry of Defence that the most economic return we can get is an investment in the Territorial Army, in both military and social terms for a reserve army, and can he not accelerate the reversal of the policy of disbanding it which an earlier Government of his persuasion initiated?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, that is another question—a question of detail within the general confines of what I have said. No doubt the noble Lord will pursue it in his own way, and, I hope, in his own time.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that some of us believe that the action of Canada may make it a little easier to follow part of our previous policy, which was to try to get, in the Pacific at least, a nuclear-free zone? Secondly, anent the question of the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, regarding the famous dictum of the revered Winston Churchill, is my noble friend aware that the outstanding words of Churchill were "Jaw, jaw, jaw, is better than war, war, war"?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I resist the temptation to follow 1125 my noble friend or the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, into the deep recesses of recent history and prose style. However, what my noble friend has said is perfectly true. All of these proposals were made during the United Nations Special Session on Disarmament. Canada has made its own proposals; so have the French. A number of interesting and, it may he, significant proposals aimed at the immediate future have been made which we are very seriously and closely considering with the countries who made them. We are considering them not only with like-minded Allies, but also with an increasing number of non-aligned and neutral countries—some of them. indeed, in Eastern Europe—with whom I think increasingly the Western democracies are finding greater common ground.
§ Lord BOYD-CARPENTERMy Lords, will the noble Lord make it clear that he and the Government do not accept the comments and suggestions of his noble friend Lord Brockway about United States' bases in this country, but, on the contrary, that this Government, like all their predecessors, recognise that it is as a result of the closest Anglo-American co-operation in defence that peace, order and liberty have any chance of enduring in this world, particularly in view of the recent news in respect of the Russian manoeuvres?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I certainly agree with the remark about the importance of Anglo-United States co-operation. In security matters, as in every other matter, I can heartily agree with the noble Lord. As to the first part of his supplementary question, a good deal of that is a question of opinion, some of which I may share. But I take this opportunity of warmly agreeing with him on the latter part of his question relating to our relations with the United States.
I think that this is an appropriate moment at which, in the absence of the Leader, I might suggest to your Lordships that is it now time to go on to other business.