§ Q6. Mr. Rankinasked the Prime Minister what consultations he has had with the President of the United States of America on the proposal to add surface ships armed with Polaris missiles to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation multilateral force.
§ The Prime MinisterI am in frequent touch with the President of the United States t but it is not customary to reveal what passes in these exchanges.
§ Mr. RankinThen is the Prime Minister telling us that he has had no report of the visit of President Kennedy's representative, Mr. Livingston Merchant, to Western Europe? Is he aware that Mr. Merchant's visit has been received with great satisfaction in America, because one achievement has been that Western Germany has decided to take a substantial financial share in the proposed surface fleet equipped with Polaris missiles? If that be the case, does it not cut across the right hon. Gentleman's interpretation—[HoN. MEMBERS: "Too 206 long."]—of Article 6—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech"]—of the Nassau agreement?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. When any particular plan is worked out it will be put before N.A.T.O. for its consideration. The broad principles were laid down in the Nassau Agreement and debated in this House. When any legal question arises, it will no doubt he considered then.
§ Mr. HealeyBut is it not the case that the British and German Defence Ministers yesterday signed a communiqué saying that they had agreed in principle to contribute to this deterrent? Does not the Prime Minister owe the House and the country the duty to give more details of this most important matter? Is it not the case that we are now committed to spending £400 million on Polaris, £400 million on the T.S.R. system, £200 million on keeping the V-bombers going, and now another £200 million on a multilateral N.A.T.O. deterrent without any political or strategic explanation being given? Will the Prime Minister lay a White Paper, so that the House and the country can judge the wisdom of the Government's policy?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir. At this stage, it would be quite wrong to do so. The matter has been discussed in principle in our defence debates, and discussions and negotiations are being carried on which will take the N.A.T.O. Council a long time. If at some point it is thought right to have a debate, or if it is possible to have a debate, we will consider it, but it is not, at this time, possible.
§ Commander CourtneyWould not my right hon. Friend agree that in the event of a future war, this proposal, if implemented, would give a maritime Power a cast-iron excuse for embarking at the outset on an unrestricted submarine campaign?
§ The Prime MinisterOf course, many considerations have to be gone into. All that has happened so far is that the broad principles were agreed at Nassau, and we shall stick to what we undertook. That is a question for consideration by all the countries concerned, and possibly, after the N.A.T.O. conference in Ottawa, which is meeting generally to deal with another aspect in the first instance, this wider issue may be considered.
Mr. H. WilsonBut is not the Prime Minister aware that there is very widespread feeling in all parts of the House, because large sums—very large sums, indeed—are being voted by the House for defence without any information being given to the House? We had nothing in the White Paper or in the defence debate about some items, and even larger commitments seem to be in process of being entered into. Is it not right that at the earliest possible moment after the Government have come to a decision on policy, the House should be informed in fullest measure?
§ The Prime MinisterThese are merely preliminary discussions going on at present among various N.A.T.O. members.