§ Q7. Mr. Emrys Hughesasked the Prime Minister whether the public speech by the Foreign Secretary at Ottawa on 21st May on the subject of an independent nuclear deterrent represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Mr. HughesSince the Foreign Secretary said that Britain intended to be strong enough and rich enough to support an independent nuclear deterrent plus conventional forces, will the Prime Minister tell us whether the Government think that they can possibly do this without a tremendous strain on the British economy? Further, will he say whether the Government still adhere to their policy that they are prepared to go into a nuclear war without the support of America and without the support of the N.A.T.O. countries?
§ The Prime MinisterWe debated all these matters at length in a two-day debate, and I think that they are much better dealt with in that way than by Question and Answer.
§ Mr. Biggs-DavisonDoes not the Opposition's policy in this respect rule 1120 out any question of the independent lead for which they have been asking in the series of Questions just passed, and would it not, in fact, face the people of this country with a choice between defeat or dependence?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Mr. HealeyIs the Prime Minister aware that that speech of the noble Lord specifically rejected the argument used by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence, when we debated this matter in the House, that we could not trust our allies in this respect? Would not the Government be wise to publish the real reason for their nuclear deterrent policy, namely, the desperate but ill-founded hope that it may prove a useful instrument for catching votes?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir; it is based upon what we believe to be our national duty.
§ Mr. ShinwellDid not the Foreign Secretary welcome the concept of a mixed-manned nuclear force which would be under general control, not necessarily under British control? Does not that dispose of the concept of the British independent deterrent?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Sir, no more than it disposes of the concept of an American independent deterrent.
Mr. H. WilsonHas the Prime Minister seen in a Sunday newspaper the long list of quotations showing that, on the subject of the noble Lord's speech, the Government speak with one voice when talking to their allies but with another voice for political purposes at home? Since the right hon. Gentleman and the noble Lord claim to have an independent deterrent, which is to be manufactured in America anyway, will he say whether he thinks that President Kennedy thinks that we have got an independent British deterrent?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir; it was that arrangement which I made with him at Nassau.
§ Mr. C. PannellOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) asked the Prime Minister to comment upon the Opposition's policy as though he were 1121 responsible for it. Is it not a rule of the House that Ministers may answer only for malters within their own responsibility, not the responsibility of others?
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is extremely tedious to ask people to interpret other people's views or thoughts, but it wastes a lot of time to pull up all questions which are out of order.