HC Deb 23 May 1963 vol 678 cc636-9
Q2. Mr. A. Henderson

asked the Prime Minister whether, following the recent exchange of letters between President Kennedy, Mr. Khrushchev and himself, it is now intended to hold a Foreign Ministers Conference at Geneva on the problem of banning nuclear tests.

Q4. Mr. Prentice

asked the Prime Minister if Her Majesty's Government will now make new proposals to break the deadlock in the negotiations for a nuclear test ban treaty.

Q5. Mrs. Butler

asked the Prime Minister what recent discussion he has had with President Kennedy about steps which can be taken to prevent further deterioration in the nuclear test ban position, and, in particular, the acceptance of Russian proposals for three on-site inspections annually.

Q6. Mr. Allaun

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the latest evidence that any significant series of nuclear test explosions would be almost impossible to conceal, he will now ask President Kennedy to agree to the Soviet proposal for a test-ban treaty including three on-site inspections annually and three automatic detection posts.

Mr. R. A. Butler

I have been asked to reply.

President Kennedy and my right hon. Friend have made a new approach to Mr. Khrushchev. His reply was received only recently, and is still under study. Any statement by me would therefore be premature at present.

Mr. Henderson

Will the First Secretary convey to the Prime Minister the suggestions we should like to make from this side of the House? First of all, in view of the continued deadlock, is it not time that the Foreign Ministers took over these negotiations at the Geneva Conference? Secondly, could we not bring to an end this interminable argument about the number of on-site inspections each year, and propose a longer term of years—say, five or six—and relate the number of on-site inspections to that term of years? Could we not have an entirely different approach with a view to ending this deadlock?

Mr. Butler

The initiative has been taken to reply to Mr. Khrushchev, and I will certainly convey the constructive ideas of the right hon. and learned Gentleman to my right hon. Friend.

Mr. Prentice

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the conversations that took place at Chequers on Saturday gave rise to some expectation that there might be an initiative to propose a compromise on the number of on-site inspections? Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, if this is to be done, there is an urgency about it before some major new series of tests begins on either side?

Mr. Butler

This matter was discussed at Chequers very fully, and that has resulted in further collaboration between my right hon. Friend and the President of the United States. It is hoped that something will come of this initiative.

Mrs. Butler

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the acceptance by the Russians of the principle of inspection was a major concession which ought to be reciprocated by the West? Is he aware that many people feel that this insistence on a few additional annual inspections is intolerable hair-splitting, in view of the unimaginable consequences that will follow failure to get a test ban? Has the Prime Minister urged President Kennedy to take a personal initiative to try to secure agreement?

Mr. Butler

The problem is that the scientific advice we receive is that the Russian proposal for three on-site inspections annually would still be inadequate. That is a matter of opinion, but that is the advice we receive. There is no obstruction. We are trying to proceed on a new initiative in the matter.

Mr. Frank Allaun

Has not the right hon. Gentleman seen the evidence given last month by American scientists that the risk of an undetected test is minute? Does he agree with that? Whatever that risk, is it not smaller than the risk of the alternative, which is a complete breakdown of the talks and the arms race getting completely out of control?

Mr. Butler

We have been into this question of undetected tests, but I must say that our scientific advice is that it is very difficult to accept the view expressed by the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun).

Mr. P. Noel-Baker

Did the Prime Minister and President Kennedy offer in their letter to meet Mr. Khrushchev? Does the First Secretary recall that in their letter to Mr. Khrushchev in February, 1962, they said that they would be ready at any time to go to Geneva to break the deadlock?

Mr. Butler

I am not at liberty to explain or to expound the contents of the recent initiative, as I said in my original reply, but I think that any possibility of a meeting must be held in mind in view of the extreme seriousness of the issue.