Chemical Weapons (Hansard, 17 June 1986)

§ 4. Mr. Pike
asked the Secretary of State for Defence whether the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation force goal on chemical weapons includes air-delivered munitions.

§ Mr. Stanley
This force goal invites the United States to modernise its chemical weapon stocks with binary munitions. The force goal itself is classified. The United States Government's plans for the modernisation of its chemical weapon stocks are set out in the United States Defence Secretary's annual report to Congress for the fiscal year 1987 and includes an air-delivered weapon.

§ Mr. Pike
Have the Government discussed with the Americans contingency plans about where, in times of crisis, these appalling chemical weapons will he sited in this country? If such discussions have taken place, will the Minister make the public of this country aware of where they will be placed? If discussions have not taken place, will he tell the House in what circumstances they will be sited in this country?

§ Mr. Stanley
No such discussions have taken place to date. As we have said many times, if a proposal is put to us, it will be considered by the Government at the time.

§ Mr. Conway
Bearing in mind the amount of time that British troops in Germany spend on training in nuclear, biological and chemical safety suits, what are the chances of protection for those troops if we follow the advice of the Labour and Liberal parties and independently and unilaterally do away with our nuclear deterrent, which does afford those front-line troops some protection, as we did with chemical weapons and got no response from the Soviet Union?

§ Mr. Stanley
My hon. Friend is entirely right to draw attention—and I hope that it will be noted more widely — to the one-sided disarmament tendencies inside the Liberal party.

§ Mr. Denzil Davies
The Minister said that there would be an air-delivered system. Why does he not make it clear that by air delivery what is meant is the F111s at Upper Heyford and Lakenheath delivering bigeye bombs, as that is the only way in which they can be delivered? Why does he not admit that plans for that are already in operation'?

§ Mr. Stanley
No such plans have been put to us, but if the right hon. Gentleman is concerned about the alternative means of delivery for the United States chemical weapon deterrent, I hope he will hear in mind that the Soviet Union is now able to deliver chemical weapons over any of the NATO countries of western Europe from the sea, from the air, from land-based missiles and from artillery.