§ Q5. Mr. Bruce-Gardyneasked the Prime Minister if he will undertake discussions with the Prime Minister of France regarding the eventual co-ordination of the British and French nuclear deterrents.
§ The Prime MinisterI would refer the hon. Member to what I said in reply to Questions by the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Eldon Griffiths) and my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Mr. Raphael Tuck) on 17th July.—[Vol. 787, c. 878–81.]
§ Mr. Bruce-GardyneLast week, the Prime Minister told my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition that he had no proposals to make to the French Government on this matter. The French 1488 Prime Minister has, however, made a specific proposal suggesting that the co-ordination of the British and French deterrents would form the logical follow through of British entry into the European Community. What are the Prime Minister's views about that specific proposal?
§ The Prime MinisterThat was not a specific proposal. The French Prime Minister said in his speech—it was not at all misquoted by the hon. Member—that he envisaged this as something which would follow after British entry into the Community. It is, therefore, not an immediate proposal by the Prime Minister of France or, as far as I am aware, by anyone else. Our view, as I told the right hon. and learned Member for Hex-ham (Mr. Rippon) on 17th July, is that while I favour the setting-up of arrangements for much closer co-operation on defence matters by the European countries, not least between France and ourselves, this should be done within N.A.T.O. and the overall control of N.A.T.O.
§ Mr. MendelsonWill my right hon. Friend take note, however, that there is growing opposition in France to the tremendous expenditure envisaged on nuclear weapons, as there is growing opposition to this expenditure in this country? Will he not, therefore, listen to this advice and take up this point but rather correspond to the policy on foreign affairs of the French Government, which wishes for an overall agreement with Eastern Europe? Is there not a more fruitful field of joint co-operation there than in these nuclear proposals?
§ The Prime MinisterThe question of public opinion in France and any review of nuclear policy in France must be a matter for the French Government and people. Our concern in these proposals is to express our hope that France will now come back fully within the framework of N.A.T.O. in all these defence matters and that any question of this kind is best discussed in the Nuclear Planning Group of N.A.T.O. With French co-operation there, I am sure that we could make the best possible progress in the direction which most hon. Members would wish to see. With regard to both parts of Europe and further afield, I have already referred 1489 to the European Security Conference and also to the vitally important strategic arms limitation which I shall be discussing with the President in the near future.
§ Mr. Eldon GriffithsWill the Prime Minister dispose of the myth on his own benches that there is anything in the Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent Anglo-French collaboration? Will not he also agree that Britain has advantages to gain, both in technology and in finance, from collaborating with the French?
§ The Prime MinisterI think I have made it clear that on any reading of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, there is no question of proliferation, as far as collaboration between two nuclear Powers is concerned, such as Britain and France, Britain and America or any other two nuclear Powers. The question of a breach of that treaty would arise if there were, for example, a European deterrent which went beyond the existing nuclear Powers, unless, as the treaty obviously envisages, there were at some distant future time a single country in Europe with a single defence administration and a single foreign policy, and which inherited any nuclear equipment or nuclear potentialities of its individual members.
§ Mr. MayhewIs not there a very great difference between the idea of a European deterrent, to which the objections are obvious, and the idea of an agreement between Britain and France confined to the joint control of their existing nuclear weapons, which would reduce the number of independent deterrents from five to four and might have considerable advantages to both countries?
§ The Prime MinisterThe answer I gave to the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Eldon Griffiths) was in relation to the provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and I think that I gave the right interpretation of it. Certainly I agree that there is a very big difference between a European nuclear deterrent, as my hon. Friend has said, and co-operation between individual nuclear Powers. But, so far, co-operation between Britain and France has been largely precluded by the specific nuclear policy of the previous French Govern- 1490 ment and by the fact that the French Government have not been taking part actively in N.A.T.O. and particularly within the Nuclear Planning Group. If France were to come within the nuclear planning group, that might help to create a new situation.
§ Mr. AmerySeeing that there is both a British national plan and an Anglo-American plan for the utilisation of the British deterrent, will the Prime Minister at least keep an open mind about the possibility of an Anglo-French plan if other circumstances, economic, Common Market and so on, should hake this seem desirable?
§ The Prime MinisterThe answer is, as I have said, that this is a matter within the alliance of N.A.T.O. and of the Nuclear Planning Group. We should be more than happy to have the opportunity of talking to the French within the Nuclear Planning Group of N.A.T.O. So far France has not been playing any part in it.
§ Mr. HeathThe Prime Minister will agree that we still have national control over our own nuclear deterrent, within the terms of the negotiation of its attribution to N.A.T.O. when required. If the French Prime Minister comes forward with proposals for Anglo-French co-operation in the nuclear field in the context of discussions about the Common Market, is the Prime Minister prepared to consider and discuss these proposals?
§ The Prime MinisterI know that the right hon. Gentleman for some time, since long before the French Prime Minister's speech, has been advocating something of this kind in connection with the European negotiations, particularly during the period of government of President de Gaulle. In my view, it would be extremely unwise to link this with negotiations for entering into the Common Market. I have seen no disposition on the part of the Six to attempt to extract from us a deal of that kind, linking two things which are very different indeed. There is room for co-operation, on the other hand, between Britain and France on a wide issue of subjects and for an improvement in relations which have not been all that good for several years. The right forum for talks with the French in the nuclear military field is not the Common Market but N.A.T.O.
§ Mr. Philip Noel-BakerWill the Prime Minister bear in mind that the most important fact about nuclear weapons is that the world stock has grown in 10 years by one hundred times to the present stock of a million megatons? Will he reaffirm that this is regarded by the Government as a growing danger and that it is still their policy to work for the abolition of all weapons of mass destruction?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, it is our aim to work for that. Without commenting on the figures quoted by my right hon. Friend, I will go one stage further and say that there is a danger of a new qualitative as well as quantitative risk in the arms race with the introduction of A.B.M.s and things of that kind. That is why we attach so much importance to the forthcoming talks, if they are held, as we hope they will be, between the Soviet Union and the United States of America. It would of course be most valuable if France now felt able to sign the test ban and the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Failure to take these two steps is the most important factor which inhibits further co-operation.
§ Mr. HeathWhile we are accustomed to the Prime Minister saying what he would like the French Government to do, my question to him was quite specific If the French Prime Minister comes forward with proposals for Anglo-French co-operation, is the Prime Minister prepared to consider and discuss them?
§ The Prime MinisterI replied to that question the first time it was asked, and I will repeat what I said, even though it is a hypothetical question. The French Prime Minister has come forward with no such proposals. We are prepared to discuss nuclear military co-operation, whether with France or with other allies, in the proper forum, which is the Nuclear Planning Group of N.A.T.O. I hope that is the answer which the right hon. Gentleman wants, and that he will support it, because it is right. I said also that it would help if the French were to sign the test ban treaty and the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and I hope that he will support that. The answer is yes, in the proper forum, which is the nuclear planning group of N.A.T.O.