HL Deb 17 November 1959 vol 219 cc604-6

3.3 p.m.

LORD WINSTER

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Defence White Papers of 1957 and 1958 still represent the defence policy of the Government, particularly as regards the immediate use of nuclear weapons against an aggressor who is only employing conventional weapons.]

THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (LORD CARRINGTON)

My Lords, there has been no change in the policy of the Government as set out in the Defence White Papers, and as stated in your Lordships' debates and in those in another place.

LORD WENSTER

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the policy laid down in the White Papers is not in some respects at variance with that laid down by General Norstad for N.A.T.O., and also with the views recently expressed by General Cowley, which had the approval of the War Office? Is it not very important that these differences of view should be brought into line at the very earliest possible moment.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, the policy of Her Majesty's Government is not at variance with that of N.A.T.O. In fact, the noble Lord will remember the phrase from paragraph 12 of the White Paper of 1958, which begins, The strategy of N.A.T.O. is based on a frank recognition …. and so on. As regards General Cowley's speech, I feel sure that the noble Lord will have read the answer given by my right honourable friend the Minister of Defence in another place.

THE EARL OF SWINTON

My Lords, I do not know whether it is possible to pursue this matter by question and answer. Would it not be for the convenience of the House if, when the Defence White Paper is produced in February, there could be a very clear statement of what Government policy is.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I will bring that suggestion to the attention of my right honourable friend the Minister of Defence, but I have no doubt that that is his intention.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, in preparing this White Paper on Defence, would it not be wise for the Government frankly to recognise that the policy of the use of the ultimate deterrent set out in the 1957 and 1958 White Papers is now completely out of date; and on that reexamination will they present us with some different policy in the next White Paper?

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I think that perhaps it is unwise to go into this sort of subject at Question Time; but of course I will bring what the noble Viscount has said to the attention of my right honourable friend.

LORD REA

My Lords, can the noble Lord give some indication of the general detailed policy of the Government in these matters, because, although the White Paper will be out in February, I think, with other noble Lords, that there is some confusion as to where exactly the Government stand on nuclear weapons, conventional weapons, and long-term and short-term programmes.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I am sorry that I have not made myself clear. I hope that the noble Lord will remember that in my original Answer I told your Lordships that there had been no change in the policy of the Government as set out in the Defence White Papers.

LORD WINSTER

My Lords, may I ask whether it is not the case that General Cowley, speaking with the approval of the War Office, said that the policy laid down in the White Paper means one of two things, either defeat or suicide.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I think that if the noble Lord will look again at the question and answers in another place he will see that my right honourable friend said that General Cowley's speech was made with the general approval of the War Office, but not the contents of the speech. They agreed that he should make a speech as a stimulation to discussion.

LORD WINSTER

My Lords, surely the noble Lord will agree that "approval of the War Office" to such a statement means that the War Office approved of what General Cowley said; and what he said is at variance with the White Paper.

LORD CARRINGTON

My Lords, I do not really think that it means that. I would advise the noble Lord, if I may, to read the question and answers in another place.