10. Mr. HughesTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are his priorities in relation to reducing the risk of global conflict in 1994.
§ Mr. HanleyThe Government's plans for the defence of the wider security interests of the United Kingdom are set out in "Defending our Future", the 1993 statement on the defence estimates, a copy of which is in the Library.
§ Mr. Simon HughesGiven that events in places such as Korea cannot give any encouragement to the belief that we are succeeding in nuclear non-proliferation around the world, and given the decision announced in the House before Christmas to go ahead with THORP, unless the court case that begins on Thursday overturns the position —whatever else that decision may be, it cannot make nuclear non-proliferation less likely—will the Government state what they intend to do this year to implement their obligations under article 6 of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty to
pursue negotiations in good faithfor non-proliferation? What action will be taken on negotiations this year?
§ Mr. HanleyThe United Kingdom Government's policy on the non-proliferation treaty is to work towards its unconditional indefinite extension in 1995. The proof of 12 the pudding is in the eating, and we have shown our readiness to reduce our nuclear arsenal wherever we can. In addition to the recent announcement on warhead numbers by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State, we have reduced our RAF nuclear strike squadrons from 11 to eight, we have given up our nuclear artillery and Lance missile roles, we have reduced our WE177 stockpile by more than half, and we have eliminated our maritime sub-strategic nuclear capability.
The hon. Gentleman asked about priorities and global conflict. I assure him that one priority of the Government is not to follow the Liberal Democrats' policy of cutting defence expenditure by half by the year 2000, which is grossly irresponsible.
§ Mr. Robert BanksDoes my hon. Friend agree that we can enhance our contribution to the task of reducing the risk of global conflict by reducing our support services costs in favour of front-line forces? In the context of privatisation and the front-line force review, will my hon. Friend consider freezing the decision to move the RAF's support management group in my constituency to RAF Wyton in Cambridgeshire so that a market test can be undertaken, without the cost of the move, into the possibility of retaining that group in Harrogate?
§ Mr. HanleyI think that my hon. Friend has the support of the House when he says that the most effective British forces are those with the greatest capability in the front line. We do, however, need effective and efficient support. That has to be looked at and we should certainly not cut back on the front line at the cost of allowing ineffective and inefficient support.
I am afraid that the particular case that my hon. Friend has raised has already been proven and will not be reopened.
§ Mrs. Anne CampbellDoes the Minister agree that one of the greatest threats to global security today is the rise of nationalism and facism? Does he not consider that one of the best ways to fight that rise is to indicate strongly to the Serbian fascists that their aggression will not be tolerated?
§ Mr. HanleyI think that the whole House will agree with the hon. Lady. I should add, however, that the Serbs are not the only people who can be guilty of those charges.