HC Deb 15 July 1980 vol 988 cc1210-2
4. Mr. Adley

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he intends to take to inform the public nationally why he has decided to station cruise missiles in Great Britain; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Pym

I have done my best, both within this House and outside over many months, to explain to the nation why it is so vital for the defence of this country that these missiles should be based here. As I have already announced, I am taking special steps to make available further detailed information to those living in the neighbourhood of the two selected bases.

Mr. Adley

In light of the campaign spearheaded by the Moscow faction in the Labour Party, which is well illustrated by Question No. 5, will my right hon. Friend stress that an effective deterrent is the best guarantee of Britain's peace? Does he agree that if the Afghans had had cruise missiles they would not have been invaded by the Russians?

Mr. Pym

I endorse what my hon. Friend says about the effectiveness of a deterrent strategy. That is our first responsibility in order to prevent a war from breaking out. If the Afghans had had that type of armament perhaps the history in that part of the world would be different. Nevertheless, we still hope that there will be a withdrawal by the Russian forces at some stage so that stability can be restored to south-west Asia.

Mr. Ford

What are the right hon. Gentleman and the Government doing to secure negotiations on a reduction in nuclear forces with the USSR prior to the deployment of the cruise missile?

Mr. Pym

When NATO announced its decision in December there was an arms control element to the agreement. The response so far from the Soviet Union has been extremely disappointing, although there are some signs that its attitude is altering. The United States proposes to withdraw 1,000 warheads unilaterally. That process is already in train. It has met with no remotely comparable response from the other side of the Iron Curtain.

Mr. Buck

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is widespread acceptance in his constituency, in my constituency and in neighbouring constituencies that it is right for the protection of our land and the Alliance that the missiles should be stationed here?

Mr. Pym

I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend. However reluctant it might be, there is widespread acceptance of the decision on the basis that, for security reasons, it is necessary.

Mr. Newens

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the stationing of cruise missiles here means that Britain will be made a primary target in any war, even if it is not of our making? How on earth can that represent any defence for the people of this country? Surely it puts them in a more dangerous position.

Mr. Pym

We have been in that position for many years, under Governments of both parties. Only in alliance with our neighbours and allies can we secure our own and their security and freedom. The Alliance agreed unanimously that the modernisation programme was necessary. The Government also take that view. I have proposed and defended it in the House.

Mr. Michael McNair-Wilson

Is my right hon. Friend aware how much the people of Newbury appreciate his offer to visit the town before the end of the month to explain the reasons for the missiles being based nearby? Does he expect to have available the further literature which the Ministry promised?

Mr. Pym

I shall be pleased to attend a meeting in my hon. Friend's constituency before the end of the month. I confirm that the further information will be available by then.

Mr. Rodgers

Does the Secretary of State appreciate that no sane man or woman wants the cruise missiles to be located here? Is he aware that his reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, North (Mr. Ford) was unsatisfactory? Surely he must have noted that, during his visit to Moscow, Chancellor Schmidt persuaded Mr. Brezhnev to agree to negotiations in principle—which he was unwilling to do before NATO's decision last December to modernise. Is it not time for the Prime Minister to show the same interest in progress on arms control and disarmament?

Mr. Pym

There can be no doubt that this Government and hon. Members in all parts of the House would welcome any progress towards arms control. In so far as there is an indication of change, that is being discussed by the Alliance and particularly by the United States, which is affected principally by the negotiations. We wish to make the greatest response possible. The response that I made earlier was a fairly clear indication of the steps taken within the Alliance to make positive moves towards arms control.