§ Q2. Mr. Rentonasked the Prime Minister whether she will make a statement on the United Nations special session on disarmament.
§ The Prime MinisterA number of Heads of Governments and Foreign Ministers have already addressed the special session. Because of developments in the Falklands, I postponed my own address and shall now be speaking tomorrow. I shall reaffirm the importance that we in Britain attach to maintaining international security and our determination to press ahead with the search for realistic, balanced and verifiable arms control agreements.
§ Mr. RentonThe House will wish my right hon. Friend well on her important visit. Does she agree that many thousands of Britons who would never accept unilateral disarmament would dearly love to see Britain taking an initiative in suggesting a practical programme for multilateral disarmament that is, as my right hon. Friend has just said, verifiable and has agreed dates for implementation? Will the Prime Minister, with her usual courage, make that message plain at the United Nations?
§ The Prime MinisterI shall endeavour to do so, and also to point out that the purpose of disarmament is not to undermine security but to enable it to take place at a lower cost to all of the nations that at the moment have considerable armouries. I agree with my hon. Friend that unilateral disarmament would open one up to attack from strong nations. Therefore, we must have multilateral disarmament, which must be verifiable.
I confess that I am a little suspicious about timetables. The Vienna talks on mutual and balanced force reductions have already taken nine years, but there are fresh proposals now being made in those talks. I hope that that will give them an impetus towards success, which they have so far lacked.
§ Mr. David SteelWhile welcoming the Prime Minister's decision to address this important conference, may I ask her whether she will have anything to say on conventional disarmament as well as nuclear disarma-ment? Is she aware that yesterday's opening of the defence equipment exhibition at Aldershot should remind us that among our previous good customers there was Argentina?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, conventional disarmament is every bit as important as nuclear disarmament, particularly in view of the imbalance of conventional weapons across the NATO line, which is in favour of the 153 Warsaw Pact. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, we have pursued a policy, as have successive Governments, of selling arms to countries abroad, but each order is viewed on its merits. The right hon. Gentleman could say that we did not always make the right decisions. However, if we pulled out of selling armaments, nations would go to the Soviet Union for their arms.
§ Mr. Frank AllaunFollowing that question, is it right for the Prime Minister in the same week to address the disarmament conference and to invite to this exhibition and sale of our latest and most sophisticated weapons representatives of nearly every Fascist dictatorship in Latin America, the Middle East and the Far East? Is not that hypocrisy?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. Weakness has been the cause of as many wars as military strength. If one looks at history, one sees that arms races have not necessarily led to wars—
§ Mr. AllaunYes, always.
§ The Prime MinisterCertainly not. The hon. Gentleman is wrong historically. What tends to lead to war is rapid rearmament on the part of a tyrant and unilateral disarmament on the part of a victim.
§ Mr. ChurchillCan my right hon. Friend reaffirm Britain's, and her, firm commitment to the concept of multilateral disarmament, and will she further make it clear that unilateral disarmament represents the principal threat to achieving a negotiated multilateral settlement, as well as potentially paving the way to war?
§ The Prime MinisterYes. Our object is to secure peace with freedom and justice. Unilateral disarmament would mean that we were not prepared to defend freedom and justice. Multilateral disarmament means that we are prepared to secure them and that we hope, through verifiable measures, to secure them at less cost than at present.
§ Mr. FootDoes the appalling answer that the right hon. Lady gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Allaun) mean that she does not mind how many deadly weapons she sells to the Galtieris of the future?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, and that is a ridiculous question from a right hon. Gentleman who was a member of the Government who signed the contracts to sell the destroyers to Argentina.
§ Mr. FootAs the right hon. Lady says that it is a ridiculous question to ask how many arms she sells to the Galtieris, will she publish the details of how many other Fascist countries she is selling arms to?
§ The Prime MinisterWhy will the right hon. Gentleman not plead guilty? It was his Government who signed the contracts to sell the destroyers to Argentina, those very destroyers that have been used against us. Why will he not plead guilty when he knows that his Government pursued exactly the same policy as ours? We look at each order on its merits.
§ Mr. FootWill the right hon. Lady look up the facts before she tries to tell such tales to the country? We stopped the sale of arms to El Salvador, to Chile, to South Africa and to Argentina. The right hon. Lady's Government have started the sale of arms to all those countries. When will she stop this appalling traffic, in arms?
§ The Prime MinisterDoes the right hon. Gentleman deny that it was a Labour Government who signed the contracts for the sale of those destroyers? Does he?
§ Mr. WarrenWill my right hon. Friend further pursue this point in any inquiry made into the Falklands operation and ensure that evidence is obtained of the political decisions taken by the Labour Government which affected the capability of our defence forces in the Falklands operation?
§ The Prime MinisterI have already written to the Leader of the Opposition and to the leaders of the Liberal and Social Democratic Parties—
§ Mr. FoulkesCover-up.
§ Mr. SkinnerWhitewash.
§ The Prime Minister—about possible terms of reference for an inquiry. May I make it perfectly clear that I think that the evidence running up to the invasion of the Falklands must be judged against the decisions previously taken both on defence and on previous assessments of intelligence. I think that we owe it—
§ Mr. WinnickWhitewash.
§ The Prime Minister—to those Ministers who have resigned and to those who have served the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence to have a thorough inquiry, and I am quite certain that neither the right hon. Gentleman nor hon. Gentlemen would wish to hide anything.