HC Deb 15 April 1959 vol 603 cc1017-20
20. Mr. Frank Allaun

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on progress made at the Geneva Conference on nuclear test explosions.

35. Mr. Bevan

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will arrange for the publication of a White Paper dealing with the progress made and the issues still outstanding at the Geneva Conference on the Discontinuance of Nuclear Tests.

36. Mr. Beswick

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is now in a position to make a further statement about the progress of the Geneva Conference on the suspension of nuclear tests.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

I apologise for the length of this reply, but I know that the House is interested in this matter.

The Conference resumed on 13th April. Her Majesty's Government's aim is still an agreement to discontinue all tests under effective international control. We hope, therefore, that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics will withdraw their insistence on a comprehensive veto in the Control Commission, particularly on procedures for on-site inspection, and also their refusal to join in discussing technical problems involved in the detection of high altitude and underground tests.

We have, however, also put forward an alternative position. We have said that. if the Soviet Union cannot bring itself to take the steps necessary to make a comprehensive ban possible, we support the proposal to approach a comprehensive ban by stages. The first stage would consist of a ban on tests from the earth's surface up to fifty kilometres and underwater tests. Such an agreement could be policed by the controls on which agreement at present seems feasible. It would only require land and ship control posts and aircraft flights. On-site inspections would not be necessary. We could continue without interruption efforts to work on the technical problems in detecting tests underground and at very high altitudes. As soon as satisfactory control provisions to cover these points had been agreed and incorporated in the treaty, tests in these environments would also be forbidden.

We would much prefer a comprehensive agreement, but if that is not possible then the alternative would be a step forward.

In the period before the Easter Recess the Conference agreed three further articles including one on the duration of the treaty and since the Recess a further article on amendments to the treaty has been agreed. For the present I regret that it is not practicable to issue a White Paper.

Mr. Allaun

Will the Foreign Secretary state whether, if agreement is reached on stopping atmospheric tests as a first step, the West would then agree to negotiate on stopping underground and stratospheric tests as well? Secondly, does not he think this an ideal occasion for limited unilateral action as a means of setting an example to dispel the suspicion which exists?

Mr. Lloyd

Regarding the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, I think it is implicit in my Answer that we do envisage such negotiations proceeding, with certain technical discussions on the problems involved. Regarding the second part of his supplementary question, I do not think the time has yet arrived for that. We still hope the Russians will accept a proposal for a comprehensive ban. Then there is the alternative suggestion to be considered; and, when we have the Soviet reaction to that, there arises the matter to which the hon. Gentleman referred.

Mr. Beswick

Is not it a fact that the Foreign Secretary and the Government could have a comprehensive ban tomorrow if they wished, and that the difficulty is that they are requesting unlimited inspection on what is, after all, a very limited amount of disarmament, namely, the suspension of nuclear tests? Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say why the proposals to which the Soviet Union have already agreed, for inspections throughout the country with non-Russian observers at those inspections, are not considered acceptable by the Government?

Mr. Lloyd

We have not asked for, unlimited inspection. The position of the Soviet Union is that there should be a Soviet veto on whether a complaint is made and also whether any inspection on an alleged complaint takes place. As far as any control system is concerned, I should have thought that quite an impossible situation to accept. With regard to the latter matter to which the hon. Gentleman referred, I dealt with that in my Answer to the right hon. and learned Member for Rowley Regis and Tipton (Mr. A. Henderson) earlier today.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

Is the link, which is very necessary from the British point of view, between the suspension of nuclear tests and conventional disarmament being fully maintained in Geneva?

Mr. Lloyd

This is a question of stopping tests and we have never accepted that as being actual disarmament. I agree with my noble Friend that, given a measure of disarmament, it is important to keep the link between conventional and nuclear disarmament.

Mr. Bevan

The right hon. Gentleman has said he did not think it was wise to issue a White Paper at this stage. He will remember that last year he seemed rather to favour that idea. Now we cannot get it. I am sure he will appreciate the difficulty which we are in all the time. Is it the fact that when he says "we " he means the Western Powers and that the Russians are " they "—" They say that "—whereas, of course, there are all kinds of rumours to the effect that there is not complete unanimity between the Western approaches to this matter and that resistance to progress is not always entirely on the Russian side?

Mr. Lloyd

I should very much like to issue a White Paper, but it is rather the same position that we had when the Sub-Committee on Disarmament met privately and kept its own records. If one side publishes, all will think they are entitled to; so that difficulty is inherent in this method of negotiation.