Cruise Missiles in Britain (Hansard, 5 May 1981)

§ Lord Brockway
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Viscount Trenchard)
My Lords, we have not yet received a copy of the report of the United States General Accounting Office but from contacts with American officials we are confident that by 1983, which is the planned in-service date, any remaining problems will have been resolved.

§ Lord Brockway
My Lords, is the Minister aware that this study is very sceptical about the operational efficiency of the cruise missile? Has not the situation been completely changed by the statement of the United States' representative at the NATO Foreign Ministers' Conference that they will establish talks with the Soviet Union to end these weapons in Europe before the end of the year? Is that not an additional reason to the pressure which is being exerted in West Germany, Holland, Belgium and this country against 6 nuclear weapons, for not entering into any arrangement with the cruise missile in view of even the military point of view that it is not an ineffective weapon?

§ Viscount Trenchard
My Lords, in regard to the noble Lord's first point, I have yet to study the report. The press reports suggested certain problems in the development programme, which is what development programmes are for. I have already said that the United States have confidence in this programme—they have the utmost confidence in it. As regards arms control, I would say to the noble Lord that he is correct of course in saying that the new American Administration have now stated their clear intention to resume the talks on theatre nuclear weapons which started in October last year and started, in the opinion of most of us, only when NATO announced the modernisation of its theatre nuclear weapons. To say that the future talks, which will be resumed this year, should be a reason for cancelling the modernisation of our theatre nuclear weapon programme is not justified. The noble Lord will have noticed that three-quarters of the sample of the recent Marplan poll believe that Britain should either maintain or improve its nuclear capability, and that is the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

§ Baroness Gaitskell
My Lords, I should like to ask the Minister, quite apart from the nuclear weapons, whether he agrees that it is a very good thing that the aggressive noises from both America and ourselves towards Russia have now stopped and the Americans want to talk to the Russians and discuss the future of whatever they are going to do? Surely this is an end to the schizophrenic attitude of foreign policy that we and the Americans have embarked on in the last year?

§ Viscount Trenchard
My Lords, I do not think that either this country or the United States have anything to be ashamed about in relation to efforts to get practical talks of an arms control nature going and have a large number of successes without which the situation would have been very much worse.

§ Lord Peart
My Lords, we on this side welcome what has happened and I believe that this is a great step in the right direction. I have always argued that we must get SALT II and III and all that going, despite the scepticism of certain people in this country and other countries. We all want this to succeed.

§ Lord Harris of Greenwich
My Lords, is the Minister of State aware that many of us take the view that the principal danger to the security of Western Europe and to Britain arises not from the deployment of cruise missiles but from the deployment of large numbers of Soviet troops and nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe? Secondly, is the noble Viscount aware that many of us also take the view that one of the most grave risks to the security of the people of this country arises from the activities of those who are warmly in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament which would strip this country of its defences?

§ Viscount Trenchard
My Lords, I would only say to the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition that 7 it is not a question of a new situation. The Government are quite satisfied that the American Government have pursued, and will continue to pursue—and the new Administration have simply announced that they intend to continue to do so—arms control. The talks on the cruise missiles started in October last year as a result of a NATO decision and United States' initiative. So far as the question which the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Greenwich, has asked, I must say that I agree entirely with all its sentiments.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, will the Government keep their eye on the fact that the American cruise missile to be deployed in Britain will be the first nuclear missile under non-British command upon which the British Government will not have a safety catch?—it will not be under dual control but under sole American control. Further, will the Government continue to consider the statements made recently in this House that we could not ask the Americans for dual control of this new missile because the Americans would charge us for it and we cannot afford it? Would the Government not agree that, given that there is in any case some objection to a new generation of nuclear missiles on our territory, it is only making it more politically difficult if we accept missiles under sole foreign control?

§ Viscount Trenchard
My Lords, I think that the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, is making play on the word "missiles". There are American bombers stationed in this country and their bases, just as the bases for the operation of these cruise missiles, are the subject of joint decision at a time of emergency. So I do not think that the noble Lord's anxieties are real.

§ The Lord President of the Council (Lord Soames)
My Lords, in view of the time, perhaps I should help the House to stay within the advice of the Companion and suggest that we move on to the next Question.