§ 2.47 p.m.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy 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 they are aware that opinion polls suggest that a majority of people in this country favour the removal of American nuclear bases from this country and whether they will revise their defence policy with this in mind.
§ The Minister of State for Defence Procurement (Viscount Trenchard)My Lords, some recent opinion 6 polls have indicated that a substantial number of those questioned gave answers opposed to United States nuclear bases in this country. But they also have shown that a very large majority of people in this country favour the continued membership of NATO by the United Kingdom. The American nuclear guarantee, which has included the stationing of United States nuclear capable forces in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in Europe for 30 years, is the fundamental underpinning of the alliance's deterrent strategy. The Government welcome and strongly support the continued presence of United States nuclear capable forces in this country.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, speaking as one who, from time to time, worked with the American forces in the last war, is the noble Viscount aware that they are not immune to what used to be called a "cock-up"? Is he further aware that this cannot be afforded in the nuclear age? In these circumstances, will he discuss this matter again with his colleagues, with a view to recovering operational control over American missiles in this country, including a dual key arrangement?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, the noble Lord has previously had an answer to the question of dual key —I think last week. I have nothing further to add to it and we are entirely satisfied with the control arrangements based on our joint decision agreement. So far as the United States are concerned, I, too, soldiered alongside them in the last war which they fought in Europe for our defence.
§ Lord PeartMy Lords, may I ask my colleagues to look at the figures, which show that 67 per cent. are in favour of the retention of Britain's own nuclear deterrent and that 73 per cent. want Britain to stay in NATO. That was the result of a national opinion poll and I think it explains why we must have adequate defence.
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord for producing those figures, which I can confirm. Indeed, I think that in the free democracies it is sometimes a pastime to criticise ourselves and our allies, particularly our strongest ally. I believe that we all have a responsibility in the free world to help the public keep in perspective criticisms of our fellow members of our defensive free alliance. My worry is that questions of this nature might have the opposite effect.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, while agreeing, broadly speaking, with what the Minister has just said, may I ask the Government whether they agree that to pay too much attention to public opinion polls, which in any case fluctuate wildly, would be not only foolish but also essentially undemocratic?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I so much agree with the noble Lord on that point. The timing of a particular opinion poll, the order of the questions, the type of the questions—and I have looked at all of them in some detail—can very much affect the answers.
§ Lord KinnairdMy Lords, would not my noble friend the Minister agree that if the defence policy of this country were always revised according to opinion polls we might soon, or before long, have no country to defend?
§ Viscount TrenchardYes, my Lords; I agree.
§ Viscount HanworthMy Lords, would not the noble Viscount agree that, while most of us do not like the stationing here of American nuclear missiles, we nevertheless feel it to be our duty to have them and that therefore an opinion poll is not really very satisfactory?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I am not in agreement with the noble Viscount. I think we should be extremely grateful to the United States for paying for and stationing their nuclear weapons in Europe to ensure that we have an adequate deterrent to deter the Warsaw Pact Alliance.
§ Lord BrockwayMy Lords, would not the Minister agree that at the least there is in this country very divided opinion upon this issue? Since there is to be a general election within two years, would it not be realistic for the Government to go slow in their policy on this issue in view of the divided opinion that there is in this country?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord and I do agree with the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition. The British public are entirely sound in the main areas. They agree with keeping up defence expenditure, with NATO, and even, contrary to the noble Lord's wishes, no doubt, with keeping our own independent deterrent. If the British public had all the details of the real choices before them as to how one keeps up a deterrent in the Alliance, I have no doubt about the soundness of their response.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, can the noble Viscount confirm—
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I think it is the turn of my noble friend Lord Derwent. We should have a question from this side of the House. Then it will be the turn of the noble Lord, Lord Kennet. Afterwards, I suggest that we should move on to the next Question.
§ Lord DerwentMy Lords, can my noble friend think of any subject upon which there are not divided opinions?
§ Viscount TrenchardNo, my Lords.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, can the Minister confirm that at present there are no American nuclear weapons in this country and that if the Geneva talks on intermediate range nuclear missiles come to a fortunate conclusion it may be possible that there never need be?
§ Viscount TrenchardMy Lords, the noble Lord is in error. At the moment we have outdated United States bombers, as we have rather ageing British bombers, capable of delivering the nuclear deterrent. The plan to which the noble Lord alludes is the plan to modernise the necessary deterrent at an intermediate range. The fact that that modernisation plan is tied to disarmament talks the noble Lords knows well, and is another subject.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, my question was related to missiles. I think the House is aware of the aeroplanes.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords—
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, it really is time that we moved on to the next Question.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords—
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords—
§ Lord DenhamSit down.
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, three minutes ago I indicated that after we had taken the question from the noble Lord, Lord Derwent, as we had had few questions from the Conservative side, and after we had had the question from the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, I thought it was right that we should move on, as we had then spent between six and seven minutes on this Question. I think it is the wish of the House that we should now take the next Question.
§ Lord Wedderburn of CharltonMy Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness, purely for the information of their Lordships in order that they should be clear, whether it is not a convention of the House that the noble Lord who asks a Question, especially having heard hostile questions, should therefore have the right to ask the final question?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I should like to make it quite clear that it is not a convention of the House that the noble Lord who has a Question down on the Order Paper has any right of reply at the end of it.