§ LORD CONESFORDMy 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 word "targeted" in paragraphs 6 and 8 of the Statement on Nuclear Defence Systems, dated 21 December 1962 (Cmnd. 1915), means "furnished with a target or shield, or with something resembling one"; or whether it bears some meaning hither-to unknown.]
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, the phrase that the Forces in question would be "targeted in accordance with NATO plans" conveys succinctly and clearly the meaning that they will be assigned 13 points at which they should aim in the event of operations. It is not intended to convey that targets would be part of the furniture of these Forces.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I thank my noble friend for his Answer? Is he aware that the previous use of the word best known to lexicographers was by Gauden, who wrote in 1653:
Not rough and targeted as the rhinoceros but soft and gently clothed as the sheep.Are Her Majesty's Government targeted?
§ LORD CARRINGTONMy Lords, I think all your Lordships will admire the way in which the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, looks after the use of the English langage in this House. But I also have a great respect for Sir Ernest Gowers, and I remember that he once said that it is one of the beauties of our language that nouns can so readily be converted into adjectives and verbs. I hope very much that, after a period of years, the noble Lord will find that the word "targeted" is beautiful.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, may I assure my noble friend that I have no objection to the word on grounds of beauty, but merely on grounds of obscurity? Is he aware that there are a great number of people, both in this country and in America, who like to ascertain from time to time what it is that their rulers are trying to tell them?