HL Deb 13 December 1985 vol 469 cc460-2

11.7 a.m.

Lord Kennet

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they agree with United States Assistant Secretary of Defence Richard Perle that "if we are successful [in SDI research] we will be putting a dome over the Soviet Union, that's the correct image" and whether it is to this end that British firms and institutions will now be working.

The Minister of State for Defence Support (Lord Trefgarne)

My Lords, the purpose of the SDI research programme is to explore technologies which might enhance our security at lower levels of offensive weapons on both sides. It is in that context that British firms and institutions will be working.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, do the Government not realise that by signing a secret agreement on SDI they will now have to accept vicarious responsibility before the world community for United States administration statements of this sort which give a very much more precise and a very much more questionable objective than the noble Lord has just given.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I am afraid that the warped objectives to which the noble Lord referred are the product of the noble Lord's imagination. The United Kingdom's position on this matter was very clearly set out in the four points to which I referred in the Statement made earlier this week.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, I wonder whether the noble Lord could allay the thoughts among the more cynical of us who feel that the support by the Government for the SDI was, at least in part, given in view of the prospect of our being able to get some fat defence contracts. Would the noble Lord care to comment not only on the apparent contradiction posed in the Question but also upon the remarks of General Abrahamson, who has said that there is no such thing as a perfect astrodome—not a dome but an astrodome—over Russia? Yet we have the situation that the President is quite confident that there is. Would the Minister care to tell us which theory or which view he supports, that of the President or that of the scientists?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, there are a number of technical questions still to be resolved. That is why the United States have embarked upon a research programme in which we are proud to play a part.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

Answer the question!

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that most scientific opinion is that the most that SDI will be able to do is to put a dome over land-based ICBM silos in the United States of America and that not much more than that is likely to be scientifically possible? In vew of this, is it not the case that star wars is not more than another enormous escalation in the nuclear arms race?

Lord Trefgarne

No, my Lords, that is not the case. The purpose of this research programme, as I said in the original Answer, is to look at technologies which might enhance our security at lower levels of offensive weapons on both sides. I agree that there are still some scientific matters to be resolved. That is why there has to be a research programme and that is why we are part of it.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many people in this country welcome moves towards providing some measure of defence against the menace of attack by missiles? Is he also aware that many people in this country regard the observation of the noble Lord opposite, that it would be a bad objective to obtain valuable contracts giving employment in this country, as rather odd?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, that was a point I endeavoured to make during exchanges on the Statement earlier this week.

Lord Leatherland

My Lords, can the Minister tell us whether any of our universities are involved in this research? If so, which?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I understand that some of our universities are interested in securing work under this particular programme, but I am not aware that any contracts have been signed.

Lord Ironside

My Lords, will my noble friend the Minister not agree that the strategy here is to disarm or to destroy the missiles when they are in the boost phase before they have got up speed, before the warheads have been divided, thereby creating what is in effect an umbrella over the airspace of the Soviet Union?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I think that my noble friend is looking a considerable way into the future. There are a number of hurdles that have to be overcome before we reach that point.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, can the noble Lord answer a rather simpler question than my first supplementary? Is it the opinion of the Government that the statement by the United States Assistant Secretary of Defence quoted in my original Question is in accordance with the four points agreed by the Prime Minister and the President last December, or not?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, if I may say so, the noble Lord occasionally quotes things out of context. The United Kingdom position is clearly set out in the four points, to which, of course, the President of the United States also adheres.