HC Deb 12 July 1983 vol 45 cc752-4
11. Mr. Meacher

asked the Secretary of State for Defence what response he has made to the latest Soviet proposals regarding deployment of INF missiles in Europe.

Mr. Heseltine

In the INF negotiations in Geneva the United States, with the full support of its allies, has made it clear that the latest Soviet proposals outlined by Mr. Andropov on 3 May are unacceptable to the alliance, because they are counter to the fair and equitable principles which NATO has consistently followed. I regret that little progress has been made in the negotiations because of Soviet intransigence. The zero option remains the alliance objective, but if that is too radical for the Soviet Union we are prepared to agree a genuine balance of missile warhead numbers at as low a level as the Soviet Union will accept.

Mr. Meacher

Why are the Government so immobile and inflexible about the INF talks, given that the Soviets have now offered parity of warheads, and not just missiles at lower levels, that the Pershing 2 and cruise missiles are clearly counterforce weapons with first-strike nuclear capability—which the Soviet Union's SS20s clearly are not — and that SACEUR already has 400 MIRV warheads, which even if technically SALT counted are specifically alloted to the European theatre? Does that not show that the Government are not really serious about disarmament proposals?

Mr. Heseltine

What it does show is that if that is the Opposition's attitude they will be in as much trouble at the next election as they were at the last.

Sir John Biggs-Davison

Can my right hon. Friend explain the mystery of why so many Opposition Members are concerned about the introduction of certain weapons here and apparently unconcerned about the weapons already trained upon us and upon Mr. Livingstone's nuclear-free London?

Mr. Heseltine

I can help my hon. Friend. The explanation is simple—they are in Opposition and not in Government.

Mr. Silkin

Will the Secretary of State now come to the point which he ignored earlier? He talked about airborne and land-based missiles. Will he state here and now that the Government are prepared to negotiate with the Soviet Union our nuclear weapons in exchange for theirs? Yes or no?

Mr. Heseltine

I know that the right hon. Gentleman realises that this is the most important set of negotiations being conducted anywhere in the work . To think that it can be conducted on a yes or no basis defies the experience of any Government in the world.

Perhaps I can help the right hon. Gentleman and deal with his question as seriously as I think it is entitled to be dealt with. We have set out clearly in the White Paper that we see a balance in the various ranges of nuclear weapons. The British Polaris system, which is dedicated to NATO, is included in the strategic systems. During the recent election campaign we made it clear that if the Soviet Union and the United States were to bring about a quite different range of deployment of strategic systems—which would be in the same class as our Polaris system—we would not stand aside from the consequences of that much reduced level of deployment.

Mr. Silkin

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Danish Parliament, most people in Holland and possibly even the West Germans— [Interruption.] Government Members hate to hear things being said to them, particularly the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Sir J. Biggs-Davison). Is the Secretary of State aware that apparently the German Chancellor is also saying that the British and French nuclear weapons, whether or not we call them strategic, should be brought intc the discussions? Is he prepared to do that—yes or no?

Mr. Heseltine

I thought I had made it clear that if in the class of weapons systems to which Polaris belongs there was a significant and substantial breakthrough in deployment between the Soviet Union and the United States this country would not stand aside from that decision. There is no sign at present that such a major breakthrough will take place.

Mr. Silkin

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question? Is he prepared to include this matter in the negotiations on the INF—yes or no?

Mr. Heseltine

The answer to that is absolutely clear. It is no. They are not intermediate range systems and the Government White Paper makes that clear. All that the right hon. Gentleman is doing is playing into the hands of the Soviet Union, which is trying to mislead Western public opinion into believing that they are.