§ Q1. Mr. Blakerasked the Prime Minister if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the text of the arrangement made between himself and President Johnson in December, 1964, with regard to the Nassau Agreement.
§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)My talks with President Johnson were confidential. But, following my visit to Washington, the Government's policy on the Nassau Agreement and the proposals for combined N.A.T.O. nuclear forces were fully dealt with in my speeches in the Foreign Affairs debate on 16th and 17th December, 1964.—[Vol. 704, c. 415–443 and c. 691–703.]
§ Mr. BlakerIs the Prime Minister aware that the only subject he mentioned in that debate which is relevant to this matter was his proposal for the Atlantic nuclear force. Is he now saying that that proposal, which subsequently proved abortive, amounted to renegotiation of the Nassau Agreement?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman is rather underrating the wide range of subjects I covered in the speech, including a condemnation of the hypocrisy of the so-called independent British nuclear deterrent—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] I am answering the preamble—which we still have not got. It never was independent. The December, 1964, discussions, by means of the Atlantic nuclear force, torpedoed the mixed manned fleet. What we were seeking to achieve in regard to Nassau has been achieved by subsequent executive arrangements made with N.A.T.O. on the integration of Britain's Polaris fleet.
§ Mr. HeathThe Secretary of State for Defence, as recently as 4th February, said that the Government still have the right to use the nuclear force independently in the essential interests of this country. Is that correct, or not?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. I said in the debate to which I referred in my answer that, if N.A.T.O. were to break down and we could not rely on the integrated N.A.T.O. position, of course the Polaris fleet remained at our disposal. That is the position.
§ Mr. HeathMay I press the Prime Minister further on this? The original position was that the Government could decide, if supreme national interests were at stake, irrespective of whether N.A.T.O. still existed or not, to use the independent deterrent. That is the statement of the Secretary of State for Defence. Is it correct, or not?
§ The Prime MinisterThat was the Nassau position, but the Polaris fleet is now integrated totally within N.A.T.O., and it will remain so. I am very glad that the right hon. Gentleman is taking an interest in this question, because he will remember that it was the Nassau Agreement that torpedoed his own negotiations with the Common Market.
§ Mr. HeathThe Prime Minister is entirely at variance with the Secretary of State for Defence, who does not say that it is totally integrated into N.A.T.O. to the extent that it cannot be used independently. On 4th February he said that it can still be used independently by Her Majesty's Government. Will the Prime Minister explain this variance?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no variance. It is totally integrated within N.A.T.O. and we shall not withdraw it from N.A.T.O. The right hon. Gentleman is free to press this in the defence debate, but what I have said, and what my right hon Friend has said, is that in circumstances in which N.A.T.O. ceased to exist of course it would revert to us.
§ Mr. Hugh JenkinsWill my right hon. Friend clarify the position about the Nassau Agreement? Is it still the intention to renegotiate the Agreement, or is that undertaking placed aside?
§ The Prime MinisterI answered that matter a few weeks ago. Having torpedoed the mixed-manned fleet, having integrated our nuclear force totally within N.A.T.O., the need for renegotiation has been less pressing. But I reserved the position by informing President Johnson on a previous visit that we reserved the right to do it at any time. I have had so many questions from Conservative members asking me to do it that I think it was wise to have reserved the position.
§ Mr. BlakerIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I shall seek leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.