HL Deb 16 October 1972 vol 335 cc1536-9

2.44 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 what they have done, or propose to do, about the Soviet claim, first made last May, that the size of the British Polaris force is limited by a bilateral agreement between the Soviet Union and the United States, in the negotiation of which this country did not take part.

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, the Soviet delegate in the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks made a unilateral statement on May 17 to the effect that, if the allies of the United States in NATO should increase the number of their ballistic missile submarines beyond those currently operational or under construction, the Soviet Union would have the right to a corresponding increase in the number of Soviet submarines. The United States' delegate replied on May 24 that the United States did not accept the validity of the Soviet statement. There is therefore no bilateral agreement on this subject. Her Majesty's Government fully support the United States' position.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, have they told the Soviet Government so?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, the United States told the Soviet Government so in the bilateral negotiations that were taking place.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, perhaps I might just clarify that observation. The United States and the Soviet Union having a bilateral agreement, the United States have naturally told the Soviet Union that they do not agree with a word of the unilateral statement made by the Soviet Union. Since the unilateral statement concerned not the United States but this country, has this country also told the Soviet Union that we do not believe a word of it and do not agree with it?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, the position is that this country supports the position of the United States in this matter, and that is what we have said.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, may the House then take it that there has been no communication from this country to the Soviet Union about this unilateral Soviet claim?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I speak subject to correction about this, but I think that is the position.

LORD ORR-EWING

My Lords, can my noble friend press this matter, because many Members of this House, on both sides, feel that we must keep our options open in this connection, partly because we may need to update the missiles with which our Polaris submarines are at present fitted, and also because the refitting of these missiles is taking very much longer and therefore it may be necessary at some time in the future to lay down a fifth Polaris type missile and submarine?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I can certainly assure my noble friend that the arms position is in no way limited by what has taken place so far.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess whether, in view of the fact that these discussions between the U.S.S.R. and the United States on the subject of a measure of disarmament—because that is what it is all about—have a bearing on the defensive situation which concerns NATO, and therefore this country, we are being consulted at all, or are being informed about the nature of the discussions between these two great Powers?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I think it is a known fact that the United States have kept their NATO allies fully informed as to the nature of the discussions.

LORD SHINWELL

My Lords, what I am asking is not whether NATO has been informed but the bearing that these discussions have on the situation in NATO. Is the United Kingdom being informed by the United States Government of the nature of these discussions, and will they be consulted before any final decision is reached?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

No, my Lords, I think the position is as I have stated before: the United Kingdom as a member of NATO and in common with the other NATO allies, is kept informed by the United States about these discussions.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess, in view of the nature of his replies, which shows the absolute dependence of this country on, and indeed subservience to, the United States of America, whether it would not be much better to end this farce of pretending that this country has an independent nuclear force?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I think that is a rather wider and different subject.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, is it not extraordinary that it is now five months since the Russians said that we have no right to more than four Polaris submarines and in that time the Government of this country have said nothing whatever about that to the Russians?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

I do not think so, my Lords. This statement was made in bilateral negotiations with the United States; the United States repudiated it and we have supported the United States in their attitude.

BARONESS GAITSKELL

My Lords, in this matter should we not welcome the operative word "limited" in connection with the British Polaris force?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I am not quite certain what lies behind the question asked by the noble Baroness.

LORD PARGITER

My Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess whether or not, in a case of this kind, where the Soviet Union put forward a proposal which apparently directly affects this country, we ought to publish what we think about that sort of thing?

THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN

My Lords, I hope that what I have said to-day will make perfectly plain what Her Majesty's Government think about it.

LORD PARGITER

My Lords, will what Her Majesty's Government think about it be made known to the House, because we do not know?