§ Lord BETHELLMy 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 case of the physicist Dr. Yuri Orlov, presently serving seven years in a Soviet labour camp under special punishment conditions for his work as leader of the Helsinki Agreement Monitoring Group, was raised last week by British representatives at the Hamburg Scientific Forum; whether Soviet scientists were present at the Forum; whether the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were represented there also; and whether any contribution from British public funds was made towards the expenses of holding the Forum.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, your Lordships will no doubt be aware that in his opening statement made on 18th February in Hamburg, the Leader of the British Delegation, the noble Lord, Lord Todd, referred, inter alia, to the "extent and depth of resentment" which the Soviet Union's
action towards men like Sakharov, Orlov, Shcharansky and many others has aroused, particularly among young scientists throughout the world".The Soviet Union, as one of the 35 signatory States of the Helsinki Final Act, is represented at the Forum. Two members of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have been attached to our Delegation to advise them on matters of CSCE procedure.The cost of the Forum, as of all other CSCE meetings, to official funds will amount to 8.8 per cent. of the total expenditure incurred by the host Govern- 998 ment, together with the travel and other costs of the United Kingdom Delegation.
§ Lord BETHELLMy Lords, I am very grateful to my noble friend for that welcome news, and I should like to ask him two supplementary questions. First, will he undertake to publish as full an account as possible of the Hamburg Forum in the reports which from time to time appear in the Official Report? Secondly, will he agree that it will be very difficult indeed for the Government to encourage the sort of exchanges between scientists such as are now taking place in Hamburg if other parts of the Helsinki Agreement, particularly the human rights provisions of Basket 3, are not observed by other signatory States?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I can certainly give the undertaking that my noble friend asked for in his first supplementary question. With regard to his second supplementary question, I think that we need to consider these meetings on a case by case basis, but on this occasion at least we came to the view that participation was more likely to be effective than deciding not to go.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the whole House would applaud the forthright statement made by the noble Lord, Lord Todd, in Hamburg, which I think was published in full in last week's New Scientist? Is the Minister aware that the noble Lord, Lord Todd, pointed out, among other things, that the possibility of co-operation in science between the signatories of the Helsinki Agreement was being rapidly destroyed by the harsh and inhuman treatment meted out by the Soviet authorities to some of their scientists? Would not the Minister agree that it is illogical for us, on the one hand, to cut sporting contacts that we have with the Soviet Union while, on the other hand, we continue at an undiminished level the scientific contacts, which are of doubtful benefit to the West, and which may possibly be used by the Soviet propagandists to show that our indignation as manifested over the Olympic Games is purely synthetic?
§ Lord TREFGARNEI would not agree with that view, my Lords. I think that the Soviet Union regard the Olympic Games 999 as a matter of considerable political importance and that is why we consider it so important that we should not be seen to support them in that view. The kind of meetings which are the subject of this Question—the scientific meetings—are altogether different, because for one thing they give us an opportunity to make the sort of statements that the noble Lord, Lord Todd, made, which I think are very helpful.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, may I also from this Bench very strongly approve of and support what the noble Lord, Lord Todd, has said at Hamburg on behalf of British and Free World science? May I also support the view taken, I believe, by the Secretary of State that these contacts must be selectively encouraged when, on balance, they will help the cause of democracy and the humane freedoms more than they will militate against them—that the thing to do is to be selective about these contacts, not to abrogate them totally without due thought in each case?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I am obliged to the noble Lord for that helpful intervention. May I add that the meeting at Hamburg was not an inter-governmental meeting, but a meeting of scientists from the various countries.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, will the noble Lord bear in mind that, although most of us would entirely agree with the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Todd, it is nevertheless extremely important that scientific contacts should be maintained? Failure to maintain scientific contacts has never been of any benefit at all. Will the noble Lord bear in mind that before 1954 there was a deep freeze in all our relations with the Soviet Union, and as a consequence we were unaware of the scientific work that was being pursued there? It came as a great shock to many people to realise that in certain fields of science—not all—the Soviet Union were extremely advanced. Will the noble Lord not agree that, while retaining the right to express ourselves very forcefully about human rights, it would be absolutely disastrous if we were to go back to a period in which we did not maintain scientific contacts?
§ Lord TREFGARNEYes, my Lords, I certainly agree with that. The scientific importance of the meeting at Hamburg, in the eyes of the Soviets, at least, may perhaps best be judged by the fact that, of their mission of 14, only four were scientists.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the question of the psychiatric treatment of people in the Soviet Republic was dealt with at all at that meeting? Furthermore, what news has he, if any, about the four psychiatrists who have been arrested because they expressed themselves in no uncertain terms about the shocking way in which people are sent to psychiatric centres?
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I agree that that is another wholly unacceptable aspect of Soviet policy in this matter. The noble Lord raised the question of the four psychiatrists which arose the other week. We have seen the reports to which the noble Lord then referred, but so far we have no further information on them.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, while encouraging contacts to the fullest possible extent, are the Government prepared to draw the line at exchanges?
§ Lord TREFGARNEExchanges of what, my Lords?
§ Lord SEGALOf scientific knowledge.
§ Lord TREFGARNEMy Lords, I think I dealt with exchanges of scientific knowledge when I answered the noble Lord, Lord Goronwy-Roberts, just now. Certainly genuine exchanges of useful scientific information, particularly for peaceful purposes, are to be encouraged.