§ Q2. Mr. Andrew F. Bennettasked the Prime Minister if she will make a new approach for bringing about useful talks for the limitation of medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe.
§ The Prime MinisterThe Government have supported the United States offer to the Russians to negotiate limitations on theatre nuclear forces. We shall be discussing with our NATO allies how to react to the recent Soviet response to this American offer.
§ Mr. BennettWill the Prime Minister agree that with world expenditure on armaments running at about $10 million per hour, it is essential that we do not re-escalate the world arms race, and that we take every opportunity to try to reduce world armaments, particularly by supporting such moves as Chancellor Schmidt's initiative? Will she take initiatives to press for a nuclear-free Europe?
§ The Prime MinisterThe trouble is that during the time in which Russian expenditure on armaments has steadily and persistently increased, NATO expenditure on armaments has been falling. It is for that reason that President Carter led the demand for a steady increase in NATO expenditure of 3 per cent. per annum. For us to show weakness in the face of increasing Soviet expenditure would be to put the future of this country and our way of life in jeopardy, and that this Government will never do.
§ Mr. Eldon GriffithsIs not the position that the Soviet Union already has a substantial superiority in theatre nuclear missiles, and that many of those missiles are already targeted on this country?
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there can be no question of agreement unless the Soviets agree to stop their additional deployment of SS20 missiles in the European theatre?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with my hon. Friend that the Warsaw Pact countries have great superiority in theatre nuclear forces—about 3:1. There are about 940 Soviet medium-range missiles and bombers, including 100 SS20s. We have a very much smaller force and it is nothing like as modernised. Those who seek to have a nuclear-free Europe would do well to direct their efforts in the first place to Soviet Russia.
Mr. James CallaghanWhile acknowledging the superiority of the Soviet Union in terms of throw-weight—or whatever jargon is used in this matter—may I point out that the Prime Minister did not answer the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport, North (Mr. Bennett) about Chancellor Schmidt, who has put forward a series of proposals for handling the interval of three years before the cruise missiles arrive? Will the Prime Minister support the approach that has been made by Chancellor Schmidt, which would increase the safety not only of British citizens but of people on the Continent of Europe?
§ The Prime MinisterWe and the Americans and the rest of the NATO allies offered to have talks with the Warsaw Pact countries on the future of theatre nuclear forces and reducing the numbers. That offer was rejected and 1230 Soviet Russia then set preconditions to talks. After Chancellor Schmidt's visit to Moscow those preconditions were removed and we are very pleased about that. Therefore, as I said in my initial reply:
We shall be discussing with our NATO allies how to react to the recent Soviet response to this American offer.
Mr. CallaghanI am much obliged to the Prime Minister. Her answer is helpful on the matter of procedure. But I was asking the question—as I think my hon. Friend was—on the matter of substance. What is the British Government's position in relation to the proposals put forward, among others, by Chancellor Schmidt?
§ The Prime MinisterI have nothing to add to what I have already said. We believe in discussing these matters with our NATO allies, which is what I believe the right hon. Gentleman would have said had he been answering from this Dispatch Box.
§ Mr. FarrWill my right hon. Friend confirm that the NATO cruise missiles that will be stationed in Britain will only ever be fired as a result of a joint decision by the British and United States Governments? If that is the case, will she assure the House that the British Government will be in possession of a master key in relation to that firing?
§ The Prime MinisterThe position with cruise missiles is the same as the position with other American nuclear weapons which have been here for a very long period. It is a matter for joint decision, and there is nothing different from the position that has obtained over many years.