Nuclear Attack: London Survival Rate (Hansard, 6 December 1982)

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

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Security (Lord Elton)
My Lords, "Square Leg" was a military exercise, in which attack assumptions were made to test military plans. In the immediate vicinity of the assumed bomb bursts, few people, if any, would have survived. Elsewhere in London there would have been millions of survivors, as would be the case in any part of the United Kingdom on any realistically foreseeable scale of attack.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is it not the case that out of 33 London boroughs, survivors could be expected in only approximately half of those boroughs? Is it not irresponsible to insist upon London boroughs carrying out full nuclear preparations and civil defence exercises when it is known in fact that the possibility of any reasonable survival rate does not exist?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I have to say that I find it odd that the noble Lord should say in one breath that survivors might be expected, on his admission, in half the London boroughs, and say at the same time that no provision should be made to increase their ability to survive. I would add in the national context that the intention of our policy is to present a credible policy of deterrence, and this is part of it.

§ Lord George-Brown
My Lords, may I ask the Minister who it should be —possibly the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins of Putney? Also, could we be allowed to ask, through the Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins of Putney—

A noble Lord
No!

§ Lord George-Brown
—to ask the Soviet Parliament which, as I understand it, meets only twice a year, to ask whichever authority it is which runs Moscow, the very same Question which is put here and to ask whoever it is who runs Moscow then to ask the Supreme Presidium of the Soviets what their answer is to the very same Question?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the noble Lord's interrogatory process outruns the bounds of possibility. If it could be in action, my Lords, I would require more than two Sessions a year to answer the questions the noble Lord would ask of that body.

§ Lord Shinwell
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the time seems to have arrived when my noble friend Lord Jenkins of Putney puts down these Questions in order to frighten us and to frighten everybody—

Several noble Lords
Hear, hear!

§ Lord Shinwell
when in fact all that happens is that he is frightened himself?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, anybody who tries to frighten the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, is pursuing a lost cause.

§ Lord Brockway
My Lords, is it not now unrealistic to expect that there could be many survivors from a nuclear attack, in view of, first, the United Nations expert statement that a nuclear weapon has now been created which is 4,000 times as deadly as the one which fell on Hiroshima—

§ Lord George-Brown
Tell Moscow!

§ Lord Brockway
—and, secondly, that the preparatory committee of the Medical Association's investigation says that, even in the deepest shelters, people will be choked to death?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, there is a good deal of misapprehension and some inaccuracy in the assumptions that underly the noble Lord's question. Be that as it may, the concern of Her Majesty's Government is to see, first, that a nuclear war does not arise; and, secondly, that if it does the maximum number of people shall survive under the best possible conditions. Both those aims require a credible and effective system of civil defence.

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister consider it profitable to talk in terms of expected survival, when the defence potential remains a wholly unknown factor?

§ Lord Elton
Indeed, my Lords. I am often at pains to avoid pursuing hypothetical questions in the House, but the weight, direction, location and number of nuclear strikes in a war on this country, if it took place, cannot be predicted by us, because we would not be pressing the button. We are concerned to see that the button is not pressed. The way to do that is to make people on the other side realise that there is a credible response. To make that reponse credible, we have to arm ourselves against the possibility of war and the need to see that members of this country, who are your Lordships' fellow citizens, survive in as a great a number, and under as great a chance of recovery, as is humanly possible. That is the aim of this policy.

§ Lord Mishcon
My Lords, would the Government consider cheering us up a little bit by making the next assumption not the "Square Leg" assumption, but the "Silly mid-off" assumption?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, as I am a rowing man, rather than a cricketer, I shall not answer that question for fear of catching a crab.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that it would be an appalling shame, if the very existence of the Soviet Union should in any way prohibit any Member of this House or another place, or any other British person, from making full use of our democratic facilities? Would he further agree that all the horrendous figures which have been quoted in this Question Time apply equally to citizens in the Soviet Union and America, and that what is really wanted—and perhaps our Government could give a lead-is that there should be parliamentary concern expressed in the Soviet Union and, equally, the United States of America? We should challenge them to do that, so that, perhaps, we could band together to give humanity a lead away from the most probable of all holocausts and back to sanity.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, it is beyond the competence of any British Government to alter the constitutional arrangements in the Soviet Union. But that said, I trust that those who live on the other side of the Iron Curtain realise that they are as exposed as we are to the consequences of any nuclear exchange and that we have a mutual interest in seeing that it does not occur.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is the nobleLord aware that it so happens that I have asked the question suggested by the noble Lord, Lord George-Brown, not in Moscow but in Leningrad, of the city soviet which is in charge of that city? The answer I received was that, although there are military preparations for the possibility of nuclear war, there are no civilian preparations, as they take the view that any nuclear war would result in wholesale destruction, and that there is so little possibility of human survival that it is undesirable, unnecessary and, indeed, absurd to make preparations for it. In these cicumstances, would the Government, even if they wish to make a pretence of the possibility of survival, at least refrain from enforcing upon local authorities an action to a pretence of survival in which they do not believe?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, it would be useful if the noble Lord, in his next opportunity to question the supposedly democratic institutions of the Soviet 6 Union, would take the opportunity of preaching the lesson, which I have tried to preach to him this afternoon, that it is in the interests of all of us to avoid nuclear war, and of saying that this country is prepared to contemplate the possibility, in order to avoid the likelihood.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
Answer the question!

§ Lord Alport
My Lords, may I ask the Leader of the House whether she does not consider that the process of this Question and Answer has been an abuse of the normal Orders of this House? Does she not also consider that if a matter is to be discussed in this House at this length, with information given to the House by the questioner, it should be in the form of a debate and not a starred Question?

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Young)
My Lords, on all matters relating to the length of time that a particular Question runs on, I try always to act as the voice of the House and suggest that we move on after a given period of time. This has, in fact, happened on quite a number of occasions recently. But I am quite sure that the whole House will have taken note of the point which the noble Lord, Lord Alport, makes about the length of time which is spent on particular Questions.

§ Lord George-Brown
But, my Lords, may I just ask—?

Several Noble Lords
No!

§ Lord George-Brown
My Lords, the House may say that if it wishes. But may I just ask, if propagandists are going to make their propaganda for—

Several Noble Lords
What is the question?

§ Lord George-Brown
My Lords, your Lordships may say what you like. But if propagandists are going to make their propaganda for things which will do our country down, it has to be for some of us to resist, and if we are to resist it will take rather more time than the noble Lord, Lord Alport, thinks is right. May I ask, therefore, that we do not fall into the trap of allowing the propagandists to make their point and rule out those who wish to resist it?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, there was nothing wrong with the Question which the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins asked. He was completely entitled to ask it. Other noble Lords may ask Questions of a contrary view. It is all part of Question Time in your Lordships' House. I think it would now be the wish of the House that we take the next Question.