HL Deb 22 July 1965 vol 268 cc889-92

3.11 p.m.

LORD BARNBY

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, in regard to the recently announced appointment in connection with the Sale of Defence Equipment, it is to be understood that the assignment includes the South African Republic whence, it is understood, purchases to the value of some £60 million were recently being considered.]

THE MINISTER OF DEFENCE FOR THE ROYAL AIR FORCE (LORD SHACKLETON)

My Lords, Sir Donald Stokes's task is to advise the Secretary of State for Defence and the Minister of Aviation on the promotion of exports of defence equipment, and on any changes of organisation that may be necessary for this purpose. He will not be executively responsible for selling defence equipment to any particular country.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, the noble Lord emphasised the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Aviation. Is naval equipment also included?

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I have always understood that the Navy came under the Ministry of Defence.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, I was puzzled why the noble Lord emphasised the distinction between Defence and the Air Force. But is it to be understood from the Answer, which seems different from some announcements which appeared in the Press—this is for general information—that Sir Donald Stokes is in no way concerned with activities to try to promote the sale of equipment to, or the purchase of equipment from, foreign sources?

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I think the noble Lord was confused like other people. The Ministry of Aviation is concerned with the procurement and sales of aircraft. My Department for the Royal Air Force is, like the Navy, part of the whole Ministry of Defence. I think that may help the noble Lord. I do not quite understand the noble Lord's point. It is a fact that Sir Donald Stokes has been asked to advise the Government. The initial term of his appoinment, which was made exceedingly clear in the Press, was for three months during which he will look at organisation and also discuss matters with industry. There is a great deal to do, and there is a possibility that he will advise on particular sales, but he will not be directly concerned with the matter to which the noble Lord refers; and, of course, Government policy must remain supreme in these matters. We are not out to run an enormous arms sale throughout the world, regardless of national or international obligations.

LORD BARNBY

I thank the noble Lord for his explanation with regard to the Ministry of Defence. But might I ask him whether he could see his way clear to having some supplementary information put in the Press? Because, from some announcements in the Press, certainly the impression was given that the appointment was for the purpose of assisting the sale of defence equipment throughout the world; whereas, if I understand the noble Lord correctly—and perhaps he could make this clear—his role is only to advise the Government with regard to what may properly be permitted by way of the sale of arms throughout the world.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, it is not his job to advise as to what may properly be permitted. He is concerned with advising on organisation, and how, within both the Government machine and industry, we can co-ordinate our efforts, and perhaps do rather better in the sales of defence equipment. I would not exclude the possibility that, with his great knowledge and experience, he may be able to assist in particular matters, but these are not within his current terms of reference. We shall see the position better in a few months, but I am glad to have had an opportunity of making this clear.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, is my noble friend aware how many of us applaud the decision, which has been indicated in his Answer, that, when defence equipment is sold, the national purposes for which it is used will be considered? Could he say whether it is a fact that purchases to the value of some £600 million are now being considered? Do these include the vehicles which might be used for military purposes; and is it the case that the American Government has declined to provide these vehicles?

LORD SHACKLETON

I am afraid I do not quite understand my noble friend when he mentions the purchase of equipment to the tune of £600 million. Does he mean £60 million?

LORD BROCKWAY

Yes. I beg your Lordships' pardon.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I am not aware of the details of the requirements concerning the £60 million, to which the noble Lord referred, but I must make it clear that, on the export of arms to South Africa, our policy has been set out in numerous statements. We voted for the United Nations Resolutions on this subject, and this Government intend to ensure that our policy conforms with them.

LORD BARNBY

My Lords, the noble Lord's reply to that second question, which was not part of the original Question, puts the matter in quite a different light because of the deduction that may be drawn from it. Arising from that, may I ask him this: is it to be understood that the Government's intention is that, in the sale of arms, unrealistic ideologies shall swing decisions as to the directions in which we sell, bearing in mind the repeated emphasis which is properly put by Her Majesty's Government on the need to protect our balance of payments?