§ Q4. Mr. P. Noel-Bakerasked the Prime Minister if he will propose to President Kennedy that, pending the conclusion of a treaty on general and complete disarmament, the Governments of the members of the United Nations should be invited to agree not to increase the level of national expenditure on armaments.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. Such an arrangement would be too uncertain and too open to evasion to be, by itself, 202 an acceptable substitute for properly controlled disarmament.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerI do not suggest this as an alternative to controlled disarmament. Does the Prime Minister recall that it worked very well in the League of Nations long ago? Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that two years ago the Commonwealth Prime Ministers said that stopping the arms race was the most urgent and important question before the world; that since then there has been a greater increase in armament expenditure than ever before and that this may explain the atmosphere of intense suspicion and frustration in the Committee of Eighteen?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with the immense importance of trying to conclude a disarmament treaty, but I feel—as I think that the right hon. Gentleman would feel on reflection—that this proposal that Governments should be invited not to increase their levels of expenditure would be impossible either to apply or to control.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerWill the right hon. Gentleman give this matter further consideration as an urgent collateral measure before the disarmament treaty is made?
§ The Prime MinisterI have thought a good deal about this and the practical difficulties of controlling expenditure. We cannot even get an inspection system for many of the things for which we are asking. The control of armaments expediture of the countries concerned, and how to prevent evasion, seem to me to be almost insoluble problems.
§ Q5. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the Prime Minister whether he will establish a disarmament agency responsible to himself for the purpose of engaging in research into the economic problems connected with arms control and disarmament.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. I would refer the right hon. and learned Gentleman to the reply given him by my right hon. Friend the then Financial Secretary to the Treasury on 13th March last year.
§ Mr. HendersonBut is the Prime Minister aware that in the United States both Government and industry are engaged in these studies? Is it not a 203 fact that there is bound to be some dislocation during the transitional period, even though the Financial Secretary, in the reply to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, stated that the Government did not anticipate meeting any great difficulties in the utilisation of resources following disarmament?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that this form of study is necessary and I feel that if we could achieve a disarmament agreement between the great Powers the sense of relief and advantage would be so great that world trade would bound forward with a new impetus.
§ Sir C. OsborneAs there are over 400,000 engineers in this country alone employed on making armaments, would not it be wise to have some plan for the future to see that these men are not thrown on the scrap heap and become unemployed if, happily, disarmament succeeds? Could not we get to know from America what they are doing along these lines?
§ The Prime MinisterA certain amount of study has been given to this, but I was asked about setting up a disarmament agency. I do not think that a special agency is necessary for this purpose.