HC Deb 14 December 1982 vol 34 cc112-4
8. Mr. Greenway

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if the Government have any plans to increase their military commitment to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Nott

In accordance with NATO's target, we are committed to a real increase of 3 per cent. in defence spending until 1985–86. This will enable us to continue to modernise our forces and maintain our defence capability.

Mr. Greenway

Bearing in mind that NATO is a defence alliance, is my right hon. Friend aware of the rumours that the Soviet Union is spending at least £6 million on organisations such as the CND which seek to undermine NATO? Will he seek to improve the quality and resources of the NATO information services?

Mr. Donald Stewart

Where is the evidence?

Mr. Nott

The Soviet Union does not seek to hide the fact that it is encouraging and financing peace movements in the West. It acknowledges that the peace movements are working in favour of its policies. The NATO information service needs more resources, but it is for the member Governments of NATO to be in the vanguard in explaining that NATO is a successful peace movement.

Mr. Denzil Davies

Does the Secretary of State agree that defence expenditure next year, taking into account the 3 per cent. NATO commitment that he has mentioned, the cost of the Falklands operation, and excluding any cost that may appear in the statement he will make today, will be at least 5½ per cent. of the country's GNP, which is returning to the days of east of Suez? Does he agree that that is a completely intolerable and unacceptable burden on public expenditure?

Mr. Nott

That is a rare intervention by the right hon. Gentleman. He complains normally that we are not doing enough. He wants either to keep all the dockyards open or to have more ships. Most of his criticisms are that we are doing insufficient. He criticises us now for spending too much. I acknowledge that his party's programme would cut defence spending by about £3 billion per annum and cause chaos for employment throughout the country.

Mr. Cormack

In view of the crucial importance of NATO to the survival of our freedom, including the freedom to write articles in the press, and in the light of the extremely interesting, well-written and illuminating article by the Leader of the Opposition in The Times today, will my right hon. Friend seek to have the Labour Party's attitude towards NATO clarified?

Mr. Nott

May I try to clarify the Labour Party's attitude towards NATO, as it is a little obscure to most of us?

Mr. Speaker

Order. I think that that would be a misuse of Question Time.

Mr. Nott

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I withdraw that remark. It is of course impossible to clarify the Labour Party's attitude on the point during Question Time.

Mr. Christopher Price

In view of the Secretary of State's previous answers about NATO and reports in the press about United States headquarters, why did the Government describe as fundamentally untrue—in the language of Watergate—a report which later turned out to be fundamentally true? Is his Department continuing the policy of misinformation that it conducted during the Falklands campaign?

Mr. Nott

I am not responsible for articles that appear in The Guardian. The main thrust of The Guardian article, as I read it, was that it was the intention of the United States Government to remove its command headquarters from Stuttgart to this country. That is not the United States Government's intention. The United States Government are arranging to have a stand-by headquarters organised in the United Kingdom to perform certain functions in the event of war. That is entirely different. I should have thought that those were prudent and sensible precautions for them to take.

Later—

Mr. Norman Atkinson

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Secretary of State for Defence said clearly that in his opinion the British peace movement and the CND were part-funded by the Soviet Union. As many Labour Members, including the Leader of the Opposition, are members of CND and active participants—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman must be allowed to continue.

Mr. Atkinson

Many Labour Members, including the Leader of the Opposition, are active participants in the British peace movement. The Secretary of State has implied that we are in receipt of money from the Soviet Union in order to put our point of view. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I hope that you will rule that such issues, expressed in the way that the Secretary of State did, are completely out of order and should be withdrawn. I hope that both he and the Prime Minister will make a categoric statement to the House to the effect that in no way do they imply that Labour Members are receiving money from the Soviet Union—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman has brought forward a political argument between the two sides of the House, on which I cannot rule.