HC Deb 07 July 1959 vol 608 cc1112-3
46. Mr. Emrys Hughes

asked the Prime Minister whether the speech of the Lord President of the Council in London on 24th June about hydrogen bomb policy represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Hughes

Can the Prime Minister tell us whether Lord Hailsham's statement that nothing would induce us willingly to become an American satellite instead of a friendly ally is Government policy? Are the Government contemplating a hydrogen bomb policy independent of America?

The Prime Minister

I have read my noble Friend's speech, and as I understand it he took the theme that the best way of dealing with these problems was to get multilateral agreement covering both conventional and unconventional disarmament However, I am bound to say that I have observed slight differences of emphasis, or small differences of approach, in dealing with this problem in different parts of the House. If the hon. Member is reproaching the Government for any slight difference of the precise way these things are stated, I refer him to the parable of the mote and the beam.

Mr. Gaitskell

Would the Prime Minister reply to my hon. Friend's supplementary question? Does he think that it was wise for the noble Lord to say that if we did not have nuclear weapons of our own, we should become a satellite instead of an ally of America? Does he think that that was a wise thing to say since no other member of N.A.T.O. has independent nuclear weapons of its own? Are we, therefore, to assume that it is the Government's view that all other members of N.A.T.O. are satellites, except ourselves?

The Prime Minister

I would not like to do anything to draw the right hon. Gentleman prematurely into this discussion. Possibly tomorrow night he will develop his views at greater length, in which case I will do my best to answer them in debate. I am bound to say that I regard the fact that successive British Governments, starting with the Labour Government and followed by three Conservative Governments, have continued with the policy of an independent deterrent as having given us some advantage in this country which we should not lightly throw away