HMS Invincible (Hansard, 19 June 1990)

§ 6. Mr. Simon Hughes
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has made an assessment of the implications for public safety from the presence of HMS Invincible in British ports.

§ Mr. Archie Hamilton
The Ministry of Defence would not allow Royal Navy vessels to operate or to make port visits if we considered it unsafe to do so.

§ Mr. Hughes
Does the Minister accept that it is no courtesy to the people of London to allow a nuclear-capable aircraft carrier to dock for a week's visit near the centre of our most densely populated city if the public cannot be guaranteed that there are no nuclear weapons on board? Can the Minister tell the House whether—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member has a right to express his views on this matter.

§ Mr. Hughes
Will the Minister tell the House whether there were nuclear weapons on board HMS Invincible last week when it was in Greenwich? If there were, will he give an undertaking that, in future, there will be no non-operational visits of nuclear warships to densely populated ports around the country?

§ Mr. Hamilton
The hon. Gentleman must be totally unrepresentative of his constituents in Southwark and Bermondsey if he is decrying the visit to the port of London of one of the finest ships in the Royal Navy. I happen to know that that visit was much appreciated by many people living in the area. I do not know what the hon. Gentleman is talking about with such a load of alarmist nonsense. We never confirm or deny whether there are nuclear weapons on ships and the hon. Gentleman should know that. We regularly practise safety routines regarding such things. If there were any nuclear weapons carried on our ships, we are happy that that would be safely done.

§ Mr. Jacques Arnold
Will my hon. Friend comment on the exhibitionist stupidity of the Greenpeace protestors in their small boats off Gravesend when the Invincible recently came up the Thames? Had those protestors been successful in diverting the course of that ship, considerable danger would have been caused to my constituents had it gone aground and blocked the channel. Does my hon. Friend agree that the fact that it did not do so is a credit to the seamanship of the Royal Navy and the river pilots?

§ Mr. Hamilton
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I do not know what Greenpeace was trying to achieve, but it is absolutely true that it caused great danger by its activities. That could have resulted in serious accidents, which would have been extremely regrettable.

§ Mr. Corbyn
Will the Minister kindly answer the question: can he confirm or deny that nuclear missiles are on the Invincible? Does he agree that every time nuclear-armed vessels are stationed at a port, they pose a danger to the entire population? Should a fire break out on one of those ships, a nuclear dust cloud would be emitted, which could result in the deaths of millions of people throughout the country.

§ Mr. Hamilton
I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman did not hear what I said earlier—we never confirm or deny that there are nuclear weapons on any of our ships. Safety routines and procedures are carried out at all the ports where such ships may go. Exercises that simulate accidents are regularly practised with local authorities. We are confident that it is unlikely that such an accident would occur, but, if there was one, we have the capability to deal with it.