§ 44. Dr. Strossasked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the fact that no threshold dose for radiostrontium may exist and that tests of nuclear weapons may already be responsible for some 50,000 cases of bone tumour in the future; and if he will therefore postpone the proposed British tests in the Pacific.
§ The Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Privy Seal (Mr. R. A. Butler)I have been asked to reply.
I assume that the hon. Member has in mind certain statements in a report recently published by the Atomic Scientists' Association. I would draw his attention to the very careful reservations made by the authors of this report; they state
In giving these estimates it must be emphasised again that, apart from the considerable margin of error due to lack of adequate data, they are based on the as yet unproved hypothesis of a proportional relationship applying to very small doses.And they go on:From this point of view they represent the most pessimistic approach.I am informed that the estimates made in this report from the Atomic Scientists' Association are interpretations of factual evidence which was available last year to the Medical Research Council's special committee, but that the latter did not consider it an adequate basis to justify their making such calculations.In these circumstances, Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to postpone the proposed tests.
§ Dr. StrossWhilst accepting the quotations made by the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask whether he does not agree that, although no one dare be dogmatic about this rather terrifying risk that we are discussing and there is some doubt, any benefit of the doubt must be given 800 to posterity, and that we have no right to be euphemistic or optimistic about this matter, and the only possible way of approach is by pessimism and not by optimism?
§ Mr. ButlerI have in mind that the data available was before the Medical Research Council's special committee a year ago and we had it in mind at that time. Therefore, I am not prepared on behalf of Her Majesty's Government to make an answer, on behalf of the Prime Minister, saying that we would abandon the tests on the basis of the atomic scientists' report which comes a year later. I am prepared to take the matter most seriously and give the hon. Member the answer I have given, but I am not prepared to give any further conclusion.
§ Mr. GaitskellIn view of the length of time which has elapsed since the Medical Research Council's Report, the number of statements made by scientists in various countries and the amount of additional evidence made available, could the right hon. Gentleman ask the Medical Research Council for a further report to bring the matter up to date?
§ Mr. ButlerI am certainly quite ready to do this, but I must honestly say that, since the Medical Research Council's Report was received and published, no relevant new fact has become available as far as we are aware. Some fresh estimates have been made of the rate of accumulation of radiostrontium in human bone, of which I have full particulars here that I have studied, but according to the information in my possession it would not be worth while doing what the right hon. Gentleman suggests. I will, however, certainly consider the suggestion and discuss it with my right hon. Friend.
§ 47. Mr. Hamiltonasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the conflicting views of world scientists on the harmful effects of nuclear bomb explosions, he will initiate the calling of an international conference of scientists in order to ascertain at least the minimum area of agreement.
§ Mr. R. A. ButlerI have been asked to reply.
The United Nations set up, in 1955, a Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation which is examining 801 these matters. My right hon. Friend does not consider it necessary to set up any other international body for this purpose.
§ Mr. HamiltonWould the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the sooner we get a consensus of opinion among world scientists the better it will be for the allaying of public concern? Is he aware that, contrary to what the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have said, the alarm about these explosions and prospective explosions is not coming entirely from Communists but is coming from people who are very violently anti-Communist and is a view which none the less is sincerely felt? Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to look at the matter again to see whether we can get up-to-date information from all the world's scientists?
§ Mr. ButlerThe Committee, consisting of most respectable representatives of the most respectable nations, last met in Geneva from 8th April to 19th April. The whole question of radiation hazards and the effects of strontium 90 was considered by the Committee, which is still collecting information, on which it will take some time to reach conclusions. As this is an international body of scientists, I should prefer to give it an opportunity to reach conclusions before we do anything else.
§ Mr. GaitskellCan the right hon. Gentleman say when the Committee is likely to produce a report?
§ Mr. ButlerNo, because it is an international body in charge of its own procedure, but I will investigate and try to inform the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. G. ThomasIn view of the disturbing statement made yesterday by the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food about the rate of strontium radiation found in the Welsh mountains and in that district—[Laughter.]—Hon. Members may laugh, but they are not laughing in Wales—is not the Minister prepared to recognise that this is a new factor? How long have the Government had information about this, and will they continue to increase the amount of radio-strontium on these hills, thereby risking the well-being of future generations.
§ Mr. ButlerThose of us who have responsibility in these matters realise that 802 strontium on herbage, especially on elevations such as the Welsh mountains, is the most easy to calculate. But there is nothing I can add at present to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, that so far the present averages measured in the United Kingdom are 67 of a unit for children under five years of age and much less for the rest of the population. The International Commission on Radiological Protection accepted 1,000 units as a maximum allowable for workers in special occupations. Therefore, so far, although it is a matter of concern that on herbage on elevations, especially in the Welsh mountains, there should be this deposit, we do not think the matter has reached a stage about which we need be unduly alarmed.
§ Mr. BevanIs it not extraordinary, when there is no doubt about the fact that these poisons are being spread throughout the atmosphere and that they are irreversible, that we should proceed to these tests before we get the report from the international body of scientists? If the extent of the poisoning is unknown but the fact that it is occurring is known, would it not be more civilised to stop all tests until we have the report?
§ Mr. ButlerNo, Sir. The right hon. Gentleman is ignoring the march of science. It may be that through the process of tests we may find that the radiation effect is less marked than it is thought to be at present. It is certainly not the intention of Her Majesty's Government, for reasons of scientific appraisal and for reasons of the defence of the country, to abandon the tests at the present time.
§ Mr. BevanBut has the right hon. Gentleman addressed himself to my question? As far as we understand, there is no doubt about the fact that poisoning is taking place. There is no doubt either that the poisoning is irreversible. What there is doubt about at the moment is its extent. Would it not, therefore, seem to be reasonable to everybody in all parties that until the facts are established by the international body of scientists, no more poisoning should be permitted?
§ Mr. ButlerNo, Sir. I have said that for two reasons, namely, the scientific 803 and the question of national defence, we think the tests should proceed in the interests of all.
§ Mr. Philip BellHas my right hon. Friend had the advantage of any information supplied by the Soviet Republic on the poisonous effects of their tests?
§ Mr. ButlerI am afraid that I cannot answer for the Soviet Government, nor have we any scientific data on that subject.
§ Mr. GaitskellCan the Lord Privy Seal seriously argue that a postponement of these tests until the report is available would seriously endanger our national defence, or, indeed, interfere with the march of science?
§ Mr. ButlerI am following, with I think absolute justice, the line which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has followed, and I think rightly followed, for the two reasons I have given— namely, in the forward march of science tests are necessary; they are also necessary in the interests of national defence.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. It is after time.