HL Deb 18 April 1962 vol 239 cc836-9

2.33 p.m.

LORD KENNET

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 they endorse the opinion expressed by the Joint Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office, in this House on April 5 last, viz.:—

That to describe the effects of a hundred megaton weapon and to discuss the effects of Civil Defence policies on the East-West balance of deterrence is to encourage illegal demonstrations.]

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (EARL BATHURST)

My Lords, the noble Lord appears to have misunderstood the purport of my remarks. The Government welcome informed discussion on all the matters to which he refers.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, I have two points to make which, if I may, I shall make in two separate supplementaries. If I am in order to quote from the speech of the noble Earl in the Civil Defence debate, I would point out that he said [col. 316]: But, what is much more dangerous, the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, and his friends persuade young people in this country to go sitting in the streets, fearing that nothing else can be done. This was said in the Civil Defence debate. I should like to ask the noble Earl whom he considers to be my friends, with the rider that I am not connected with the Committee of One Hundred, and never have been; and specifically to ask him whether he has in mind the "Pugwash" Conference of Scientists, with which I am connected and may he publicly identified, since these Conferences are attended chiefly by the senior scientific advisers of this country, the United States, the Soviet Union and France?

EARL BATHURST

Unfortunately, I have not had the pleasure of the acquaintance of a great number of the noble Lord's friends, and When I used that remark I meant it in the widest possible sense, referring to those who hold or express the same views that the noble Lord expresses. I am perfectly aware, of course, of the "Pugwash" Conference; but I hope that your Lordships will agree with me that the views that the noble Lord put forward in the Civil Defence debate in your Lordships' House are really quite different from the views of the eminent scientists who take part in that Conference.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, I accept the noble Earl's affirmation that he does not know who my friends are in any case; so that settles that. The second point I wish to make is this. To quote once more, if I may, from the noble Earl's speech in the debate, he said [col. 315]. In the view of Her Majesty's Government—and I think it must also be the view of anybody who thinks about it seriously—millions would survive an attack on this country. The noble Lord, Lord Kennet, does not like that. I should like to ask the noble Earl whether he considers this to be Parliamentary language, because I am certain that it is inhumane language.

EARL BATHURST

My Lords, when I used the term that "the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, does not like that", I meant—and I think that when one reads the OFFICIAL REPORT it is clear—that the noble Lord does not agree with our belief that millions would survive. If in any way I appear to have meant that the noble Lord was inhumane or anything of that sort. I will withdraw the remark but what I meant to say was that the noble Lord does not agree with the principle that millions would survive.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, I am sorry to take up the time of the House yet a third time. To quote from my own speech in the debate, in answer to the point that I do not accept the principle that millions would survive, I said [col. 297]: however horrible a nuclear war might be, there would obviously be some people in some areas whose lives could be saved by a good Civil Defence programme.

EARL BATHURST

My Lords, it looks as if the noble Lord and I are getting rather closer—I only say "rather closer "—than otherwise would appear to be the case. I still hold to the principle, as do Her Majesty's Government, that millions would survive.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, I accept this principle, and I did so in my speech.

BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGER

My Lords, would the noble Earl explain on what evidence he bases the statement that the noble Lord persuaded either his friends or his enemies to take this action of sitting down?

EARL BATHURST

Will the noble Baroness repeat the last word?

BARONESS WOOTTON OF ABINGER

On what basis does the noble Earl base his statement that the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, persuaded his friends, or, if he wishes, his enemies or persons he did not know, to take this action of sitting down to deter nuclear action?

EARL BATHURST

My Lords, I think I made it quite clear—and it is clear, I am sure, in the columns of Hansard—that it is the ideas that the noble Lord and his friends or enemies express that persuade people, and in particular young people, to carry out illegal actions. I apologise to the noble Lord if he thinks that I meant that he himself purposely encourages these actions. I think that is quite clear in my reply to the noble Lord's friend, Lord Longford.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, I hardly know what to say. What ideas of mine or of my friends persuade people to take illegal action? That is the question to which we wish an answer.

EARL BATHURST

My Lords, I do not think that the noble Lord would want me to prolong this rather personal debate in your Lordships' House; but I think that the entire essence of what the noble Lord and his friends, or enemies, say with regard to Civil Defence and nuclear warfare in general—and, so far as I can see, what the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, said—is quite different from what his noble friend Lord Lindgren said when he instituted that debate.