HC Deb 18 March 1981 vol 1 cc276-7
7. Mr. Marks

asked the Lord Privy Seal what proposals Her Majesty's Government plan to make to the 1982 United Nations special session on disarmament.

Mr. Hurd

The first full meeting of the preparatory committee for the second United Nations special session on disarmament will by held in May. We are considering with our partners and allies the nature of the Western contribution.

Mr. Marks

Are the Government taking any serious initiative in this matter? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Campaign for World Disarmament, for which the Government expressed support last year, is organising a petition calling on all Governments and the United Nations Assembly to abolish nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction? Will the Government support that campaign and will the Minister sign that petition?

Mr. Hurd

I am surprised at the hon. Gentleman. Everyone in his senses wants to see arms control agreements and then disarmament agreements, but they will come about by negotiation and not by the signing of petitions. Negotiations will succeed only if there is a reasonably hard-headed approach to them, based on balance in the first place and verification in the second place.

Mr. Sproat

Will my hon. Friend remind Labour Members that the French put forward specific and realistic proposals at the Madrid review conference on European disarmament, which were backed by the British Government and the United States, and that the Soviet Union persistently blocked those proposals because they involved verifiable notification of Soviet troop manoeuvres, as well as everybody else's troop manoeuvres? Is it not clear that, under the guise of protracted talks on disarmament, the Soviet Union simply wants to build up its own relative military strength?

Mr. Hurd

My hon. Friend is right about the French proposal on confidence-building measures. We are exploring a rather difficult passage in Mr. Brezhnev's speech to see whether there is any advance there, but I agree with my hon. Friend's general point.

Mr. Healey

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, even more urgent than a United Nations special assembly or even a European disarmamemt conference, are negotiations between the Soviet Union and the Western allies on the limitation of medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe, bearing in mind particularly that the rate of deployment of SS20s by the Soviet Union looks like rising from one a fortnight to two a week over the next 12 months? Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that the British representative at the forthcoming consultative committee does his utmost to press for early substantive negotiations between the Soviet Union and the West on that matter?

Mr. Hurd

We are in favour of that and we are therefore glad that President Reagan's Administration have made clear that they are also in favour. However, we are not in favour of accepting that the talks should be on the basis of President Brezhnev's latest proposal of a moratorium on such deployment which would take place when the Soviet Union has an advantage of 4:1 in this respect.

Mr. Healey

Is it not the case that, given the rate of deployment of SS20s, by the time the first of the Pershing II or cruise missiles is deployed in Europe the Soviet superiority could have risen to 20:1? In those circumstances, is it in the West's interests to avoid negotiations until Western missiles have been deployed?

Mr. Hurd

The right hon. Gentleman does not put the position fairly. We are not avoiding negotiations; we are in favour of negotiations, but only on a realistic basis. Meanwhile, we are proceeding with the plans agreed by NATO for TNF modernisation, which will start becoming effective in 1983.