§ Q2. Mr. Hamlingasked the Prime Minister whether he will now make a statement on the discussions he has had 1202 with leaders of European States on the Atlantic Nuclear Force.
§ The Prime MinisterAs the House knows, I had discussions about the Atlantic Nuclear Force with the Federal German Chancellor during my visit to Bonn in March and with the Italian Prime Minister during my visit to Rome last month, with the result that our proposals are now under multilateral discussion in the Paris Working Group.
§ Mr. HamlingIs my right hon. Friend aware that in his determination to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons he will have the full support of these benches?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. I thank my hon. Friend. This, again, was a point which I dealt with at some length in referring to the Atlantic Nuclear Force in my speech to N.A.T.O. last week.
§ Mr. MaudlingHas the Prime Minister any evidence to suggest that the proposal for an Atlantic Nuclear Force will be any more acceptable to our European neighbours than the M.L.F. or that it will cause the Russian Government any less concern?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman will recall that, at the time we came in, we were faced with a very detailed and short time-table for acceptance by this country of the M.L.F., and this was being strongly pressed both by Germany and by the United States. Since his own Government never quite agreed on whether to support the M.L.F. or not, I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will thank us for getting them off the hook by proposing a new scheme which avoided many of the difficulties for us and some of his hon. Friends on the M.L.F. and which was directly related to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons in Europe.
§ Mr. MaudlingMy question was about the reaction of Western Europe and Russia. Will the Prime Minister answer?
§ The Prime MinisterI thought that Germany was in Western Europe. Germany, of course, was a country in Western Europe—there were others—which was passionately keen on the M.L.F., and I have answered that point. The Russians were completely opposed 1203 to the M.L.F. because it seemed to them that it did involve proliferation and, to use the jargon, a German finger on the trigger. We have tried to persuade them —though, of course, I have not yet met Mr. Kosygin—that there is a very big difference between the A.N.F. and the M.L.F. because there will be built into the A.N.F. treaty measures against the acquisition and spread of nuclear weapons, which was not the case with the M.L.F.
§ Mr. GrimondCan the Prime Minister tell us more about the American attitude to the A.N.F.? Have they left it entirely to the Europeans or are they, too, engaged in these consultations?
§ The Prime MinisterThey will be engaged in the consultations. It was clear from our talks in December that they would like to hear more of the European reaction to our proposals because, I think, there was a widespread feeling in the past among some people in Europe that the M.L.F. was being forced upon them.
§ Sir Alec Douglas-HomeIs it not the case, in considering the discussions the right hon. Gentleman has had about the A.N.F., that it has very few friends? Is it not also the case that the right hon. Gentleman is misleading people if he suggests that the American proposal for the M.L.F. would in any way have led to the proliferation of nuclear weapons? The American proposal for the M.L.F. certainly meant that there would be no extra fingers on the trigger, and I think that the Prime Minister knows it.
§ The Prime MinisterMy exact words about the A.N.F.—the right hon. Gentleman can look them up—were that there were built-in provisions in the terms requiring the signatories if they were non-nuclear Powers not to acquire nuclear power and requiring existing nuclear Powers not to spread nuclear power further. Such provision was contained in the proposal for the A.N.F. and not in the proposal for the M.L.F.
The right hon. Gentleman says that the A.N.F. proposal has few friends. I would remind him that within a matter of three or four weeks we had a united Government in favour of the A.N.F. whereas the highly publicised dispute between the right hon. Gentleman and the right hon.
1204 Member for Monmouth (Mr. Thorneycroft) not only lasted throughout the last two years of the previous Government but continued into Opposition.