§ Q1. Mr. Swinglerasked the Prime Minister if he will seek President Kennedy's consent to publish the texts of the communications between them on the subject of the proposed mixed-manned nuclear force in the West.
§ The First Secretary of State (Mr. R. A. Butler)I have been asked to reply.
My right hon. Friend has nothing to add to the reply he gave to the hon. Member for Dearne Valley (Mr. Wainwright) on 14th May.
§ Mr. SwinglerCan the Deputy Prime Minister say categorically that no undertakings at all have been given before the talks between the Prime Minister and President Kennedy that would commit Britain to participation in any scheme that would spread the possession and control of nuclear weapons? Can he say that no such undertakings will be given without the consent of Parliament?
§ Mr. ButlerIn answering the latter part of the supplementary question, the Prime Minister stated on 20th June that, if there was a decision, it would be put before Parliament and could be discussed. In regard to the first part of the supplementary question, no commitment has been entered into about a multi-manned force, which is what the Question refers to.
Mr. H. WilsonDoes the right hon. Gentleman accept the American view that in signing the Nassau Communiqué Her Majesty's Government at that time entered into a commitment to establish a multilateral force? Do the Government feel they entered into that commitment, as the Americans feel they did?
§ Mr. ButlerNo, Sir. The Nassau Communiqué and the results of Nassau 1127 did not necessarily involve a commitment on the subject of a multi-manned force. We have accepted the concept, but we have not accepted British participation.
§ Mr. DribergWhen the right hon. Gentleman uses the rather ambiguous phrase that the decision would be "put before" Parliament, does he mean that it would be brought to Parliament after the decision had been taken, and with the Whips on?
§ Mr. ButlerUnder the Prerogative, the Executive has the right to take decisions. It equally has the right and duty to consult Parliament.
§ Mr. HealeyFurther to the question asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson), is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the Nassau Agreement Her Majesty's Government promised under Clause 7 to use their best endeavours to develop the multilateral force? If Her Majesty's Government do not accept the mixed manned force as a multilateral force, what proposals of their own for a multilateral force are they putting forward?
§ Mr. ButlerI could not in answer to a supplementary question make a positive statement of that character. It requires considerable ingenuity to separate the various terms—multilateral, multi-manned, multi-national, and so forth. No commitment has been entered into by Her Majesty's Government on the subject of a multi-manned force.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonHas not enough time elapsed since the Bahamas Conference for Her Majesty's Government to clear up the terminological confusion? Did not the word "multilateral" in the Bahamas Agreement in fact mean what Her Majesty's Government mean by "multi-national"?
§ Mr. ButlerOne thing I am clear about is that no commitment has been entered into by Her Majesty's Government to participate in a multi-manned force.
Mr. H. WilsonCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Prime Minister intends to maintain that position in his discussions with President Kennedy next week?
§ Mr. ButlerI cannot forecast what will be the content of the discussion.