§ 34. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the progress made at the Geneva Conferences on the discontinuance of nuclear tests and the provision of safeguards against surprise attacks, respectively.
§ 49. Mr. P. Noel-Bakerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement about the present deadlock in the negotiations in Geneva for the discontinuance of nuclear tests.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreAs regards the Nuclear Tests Conference, since the reply given by my hon. Friend on 26th January, a further article of a draft treaty has been tabled by the United States Delegation. This deals with detonations for peaceful purposes. The Soviet delegate has submitted a long list of those issues which, in his view, would require unanimous agreement between the original parties to the treaty in order to reach decisions on them in the Control Commission. A technical working group has been studying the staffing of control posts. It would be wrong to describe the negotiations as being deadlocked.
The Conference on Measures against Surprise Attack adjourned on 18th December. The marked difference between the technical approach of the Western experts and the political proposals advanced by the Soviet bloc delegations prevented it from achieving the results which we had hoped for. We trust, however, that if its terms of reference can be clarified in a way acceptable to both sides it will reconvene before long and produce an agreed report.
§ Mr. HendersonCould the Minister of State throw a little more light on what has taken place at the Conference on the discontinuance of nuclear tests? Are we to understand that the real objection on the part of the Soviet Government arises from their fear of being outvoted on the 361 Control Commission by the votes of Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government? Could not this be avoided by inviting at least two neutrals to sit on the Control Commission in order to avoid that possibility?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreIn my original reply I specifically confined myself to information which had been given in communiqués issued by the Conference. I am not at liberty to discuss precise proposals inside the Conference.
§ Mr. P. Noel-BakerWe welcome the Minister's statement that the Conference is not in deadlock. Could he clear up the point about the staffing of control posts? Is it a fact, as has been freely reported, that the Soviet Government have agreed to have four to five foreign experts in each control post? If so, should we not do well, as The Times advises, to accept that proposal?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI think perhaps that I can clarify it to this extent. The Soviet proposal does not mean the introduction into the control post of five operating staff. They still wish that all the operating staff in the control post in the Soviet Union should be Soviet nationals. They have now raised the figure of what we would more rightly term, I think, observers to five in that control post. We do not believe that the presence of those five observers, coupled with the complete staffing of the control post by Soviet nationals, would give a sufficient safeguard.
§ 37. Mr. Beswickasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what authority it was proposed by Her Majesty's Government at Geneva that neutral inspectors of nuclear tests should be responsible.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreIf the hon. Member is referring to nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes, and if it is agreed that such explosions may take place, it will no doubt be agreed also that machinery should be established under the International Control Organ to satisfy all concerned that their purposes are exclusively peaceful.
§ Mr. BeswickIs the Minister of State aware that I was not allowing for the possibility of the inspection of so-called peaceful test explosions at all? In addidition, may we take it from that Answer, 362 and the Minister's previous Answer, that it is now the policy of the Western Powers to make provision for further test explosions for so-called peaceful purposes?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreIf the hon. Gentleman will read his Question again, he will see that it refers to neutral inspectors of nuclear tests. From that, it was not very clear what he was getting at, because the whole object of the agreement is to stop nuclear tests. There would, therefore, not be neutral inspectors of nuclear tests, except of nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes. In my previous reply I have stated that the United States have put forward a proposal for conducting nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes under certain specified conditions. We have to see whether we can get agreement on that. But I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the speech made by Mr. Gromyko about Christmas time, in which he said that he would consider that proposal.
§ Mr. BeswickIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the difficulties of wording Questions on this subject is that his predecessor told us that he would not answer any more Questions about it? It is, therefore, rather difficult to get precise wording. Will the Minister now answer my supplementary question: is it the policy of the Western Powers now to make provision for the detonation of nuclear devices for so-called peaceful purposes?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreYes, that is the proposal that has been put forward and it would, of course, be accompanied by provisions to ensure that they were only for peaceful purposes, and were conducted under such conditions—that is, underground—that no contamination of the atmosphere could take place.
§ 38. Mr. Beswickasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the temporary lack of progress at the Geneva Conference on the suspension of nuclear weapon tests, he will now make a statement as to what extent Her Majesty's Government's representatives have put forward proposals for the enforcement of any agreement to suspend tests.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreThe hon. Member must realise that one cannot enforce a treaty of the kind we hope to negotiate.
§ Mr. BeswickIn view of the great interest there is in this matter, and of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman does find it possible to give details when it suits the Foreign Office—as, for example, the statement given to Press correspondents in January—may we ask for a full statement of the present position at Geneva, so that the country can take an intelligent interest in these matters?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreI have stated on many occasions that, obviously, the actual negotiations should be confidential, but if, as often happens at this type of conference, various stories leak out—or, sometimes, are deliberately leaked out—it must be within the rights of other delegations to put what they think is a correct explanation before the general public. To go further than that would, I think, be dangerous.
§ Mr. BeswickOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.
§ 48. Mr. P. Noel-Bakerasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now lay a White Paper before the House containing the texts of the proposals made by the Governments which are now participating in the negotiations for the discontinuance of nuclear tests.
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreNo, Sir. I fully understand the natural wish to know exactly what is going on at Geneva, but I do not think that a publication such as the right hon. Gentleman envisages would help us to obtain the agreement we all want on stopping nuclear tests under proper international control. The considerations my right hon. and learned Friend put before the House on 4th December were generally accepted at the time, and I think they are still valid.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerHas not the Minister himself said this afternoon that there has been a long series of statements and leakages by members of different delegations, some of them highly tendentious? Would it not now be right to follow the precedent set in the middle of 1957 for the proceedings of the Disarmament Sub-Committee, and to let hon. Members know the texts, so that they can realise the nature of the differences now being discussed?
§ Mr. Ormsby-GoreNo, because I am still very optimistic that the differences between us will be overcome. I believe that if we can continue the private negotiations they will be overcome