HL Deb 21 April 1983 vol 441 cc639-43

3.15 p.m.

Lord Kennet

My Lords I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what would be the cost to the United Kingdom of a small British double-key force, whose active participation, on the orders of the Prime Minister, would be required for the launching of any United States cruise missiles from this country, and without whose participation such launchings would be physically impossible, either within their bases or outside them; and whether if Her Majesty's Government have not yet calculated this cost, they will now do so and inform Parliament.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, a dual key system for the United States cruise missiles to be based in this country was considered at the time of NATO's decision in December 1979 to modernise its intermediate-range nuclear weapons. Such a system would have involved the United Kingdom in buying and operating the cruise missiles. In these circumstances, the sort of force envisaged by the noble Lord was clearly not appropriate, and the requirement to establish its cost did not therefore arise. The Government are satisfied with existing arrangements for joint decision-making about any use of United States nuclear weapons based in this country.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, would the Minister of State not agree that curiosity on the part of the British people and Parliament about the cost of such a force as is outlined in the Question would also be a valid requirement for the information—not only the conditions that he laid down himself for a valid requirement for information but also a simple wish to know on the part of our own people and our own Parliament how much it would cost?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, that may be so, but it is not the way in which the United States provides its allies with a dual key for particular nuclear systems. With a dual key come the obligations and responsibilities of ownership.

Lord Paget of Northampton

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the statement that in order for this country to control, or have key of, American weapons placed here involves their not being American weapons because we have bought them is the kind of nonsense which convinces nobody at all?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, perhaps I can convince the noble Lord, Lord Paget. We have a system of joint decision. That means, in effect, that the weapons could not be used without the joint decision of the President and Prime Minister.

Lord Gladwyn

My Lords, if there is a dual key system for cruise missiles, would it not in logic be necessary to have a similar system in respect of the airfields where there are based American aircraft with a nuclear capability?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, that may be so; but there is not going to be a dual key system for cruise missiles.

Lord Shinwell

My Lords, whatever may have happened in 1979 or since then, can we not have a firm declaration from Her Majesty's Government that if the cruise missiles which have been provided by the United States, an ally of this country, are to be launched from the United Kingdom, Her Majesty's Government must have accord and consent before that happens?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, let me repeat the assurance which I gave to the noble Lord, Lord Paget. Under the existing arrangements for joint political control—which is what we have—the weapons concerned cannot be used without a joint political decision by the President of the United States and the Prime Minister. This was a matter which was reviewed by both the President and the Prime Minister when both came into office, and the Government are satisfied that this is satisfactory.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that political decision is one thing but that operational control is another? If effective British operational controls cannot be established over cruise missiles except at inordinate expense, is this not an added reason for not having them at all?

Lord Belstead

No, my Lords.

Lord Paget of Northampton

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we are dealing here with deterrence and that the people who must be convinced that these weapons are under joint control are not those in this country or Her Majesty's Government, but the Russians? If the Russians do not think they are under joint control but are under American control they may very well take them out by a nuclear attack on us before they are used. That is the danger of not having a clearly-established operational control here.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, the danger is entirely in the mind of the noble Lord, Lord Paget. These are arrangements which have been in existence for over 30 years, running over a period which has seen successive Labour and Conservative Governments. I repeat: the arrangements are effective and the Government believe they are perfectly satisfactory.

Lord Whaddon

My Lords, is it not the fact that it is the practice of the Americans to have two independent officers, each of whom must have physical control of the launch of their own weapons, so that there is a dual key control at the moment, both parts of which are in the hands of the Americans? What would be so inherently unreasonable about requesting that one of those officers should be British?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, because, I repeat, a full dual key control, as it is called, rests upon the obligations and responsibilities of ownership.

Lord Brockway

My Lords, may I ask the Minister how dual control can possibly apply to the American Reserve Command, not only for this country but for Europe, established at High Wycombe? How can dual control apply to it?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, this is going over some very old ground now. The question of joint political decision refers to the use of the bases: that is what requires the joint political decision, which is the present system that we have. I repeat for the fourth time that joint political control means, in effect, that the weapons could not be used without the joint political decision of the President and the Prime Minister.

Lord Orr-Ewing

My Lords, could my noble friend say whether he knows of any evidence that the Warsaw Pact countries have asked the Soviet Union for joint political control over the 320 SS20s which are deployed and targeted against this country; and, if not, why not?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, the reason why the question has not been put is because I think we know the answer. My noble friend has put his finger on the right point. Almost certainly the answer to my noble friend's question is, "No".

Lord Paget of Northampton

My Lords, is not the answer because they are satellites and we are not?

Lord Balogh

My Lords, it would seem—

Lord Belstead

I am sorry, my Lords: perhaps it is because we have been going on for rather a long time, but I did not hear the noble Lord's question.

Lord Shinwell

My Lords, the Minister has declared that the Government are satisfied with the arrangements that have been made, but would the Government care to take a vote of this House to ascertain whether or not the situation is satisfactory?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, the decision has not just been taken; it goes right back to 1950—not quite as old as the noble Lord, Lord Shinwell, but quite a long time ago. For the noble Lord to suggest that the present Government have in some way made a new arrangement is not an accurate assessment of the situation.

Lord Balogh

My Lords, my question was that it is naïve, is it not, to think that dual political control can be established under nuclear attack?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I will not again repeat the provisions of the joint political decisions which we have with the United States. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Balogh, will look at the Hansard record and make up his own mind from that.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, can the Government tell the House whether they have, in so many words, asked the Americans to agree to the system of dual control described in the Question now before the House, and whether the American Government have, in so many words, refused to do so? If not, why are the Government so reluctant to give the cost?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, we have not put the question in the way that the noble Lord puts the question to me, and the reason is contained in my original Answer.

The Earl of Lauderdale

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that his series of answers this afternoon will give great comfort to many who have been confused by the ignorant talk about the dual key system?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend. We need these terrible weapons in order to pursue NATO's strategy of peace by deterrence, which has kept the peace of Europe for nearly 40 years; and the system of joint political decision, I do assure the House, is one which was gone through by the President and the Prime Minister when each came into office. It is satisfactory, as it has been satisfactory for the last 35 years.