HL Deb 13 December 1985 vol 469 cc462-5

11.16 a.m.

Lord Kennet

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether research results obtained by United Kingdom firms and institutions under last week's secret Memorandum of Understanding on SDI will remain wholly within United Kingdom control, or will the use the United Kingdom Government and firms make of them now be controlled in whole or in part by the United States Department of Defence.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I reported to your Lordships on 9th December that the Memorandum of Understanding concluded between the United States and the United Kingdom Governments on 6th December safeguards British interests in relation to the ownership of intellectual property rights. As I made clear on Monday, the detailed content is confidential: I am unable therefore to add anything to what I said then.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, is not the point that this research will push forward the frontiers of technology in a very large number of fields which in the future will be the centre of weapon systems of all kinds and of civilian advances whether there is a SDI or not; and the risk that we may see the results of research done in this country restricted by this agreement and thus be worse off than, say, France or Germany which have not signed the agreement at all?

Lord Trefgarne

; My Lords, as I have said, the United Kingdom has been at pains to ensure that proper arrangements are made with regard to the intellectual property rights; that we have done.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, can the noble Lord say why this memorandum has to remain secret? Is he aware that this secrecy has never been really fully justified and that a reversion to secret diplomacy in such a key area needs public justification if the Government are to give or carry conviction on the point?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the memorandum refers to a number of matters concerning national security. It is for that reason that it has to be confidential.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, under the terms of the memorandum have we not been led to believe and understand that it is the desire of President Reagan that there should be almost total participation including the Warsaw countries as well as NATO, so that the whole idea is ultimately to provide for the entire world a kind of safe cover? How can this be done if some parts of either the Warsaw pact or NATO are going to demand to have a little secret investigation on their own?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the Soviet Union are, of course, conducting a major research programme into these matters, as well. The noble Lord may not have had an opportunity to see the Written Answer which I gave yesterday to my noble friend Lord Alexander, which was not published in yesterday's Hansard but is available in the Library.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, the Minister will recall that when he made the Statement earlier this week I pressed him to say a little more about the safeguarding and protection of intellectual rights. He declined to take the opportunity then, and today he has simply said that they are safeguarded. Will the noble Lord understand that, on this side of the House at least, we are very sensitive to the possibility that arrangements may be made that are not in accordance with the best interests of British scientists and industrialists?

A noble Lord

Speech!

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, would the Minister care to say something about the point that I raised in respect of the brain drain? The Americans are apparently going to be getting the benefit of a number of scientists travelling abroad. Could we not have an assurance that there will be at least a two-way traffic, with scientists from America working over here as well? What about—

A noble Lord

No!

Lord Graham of Edmonton

My Lords, what about the protection of the small firms?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, the noble Lord asked me about the brain drain when we discussed these matters earlier this week. I told him then that without the benefit of this agreement the brain drain would have been very much greater. Now, of course, the research is going to be carried on in this country, and that means that there will be many opportunities for British scientists to participate here in the United Kingdom. On the question of the confidentiality of this agreement, I am afraid it has been agreed that it should be confidential because, as I have said, it contains a number of matters which refer to national security. I am afraid I cannot go further than that.

The Earl of Lauderdale

My Lords, would my noble friend not agree that there is a tradition of privacy and confidentiality in these matters which goes back to Mr. Attlee's agreement on American bases in Britain?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, my noble friend is quite correct. It is not the case that every agreement of this kind or every memorandum between Governments is secret but quite a number of them are, and I am afraid this is one of them.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, the noble Lord made a very important point in reply to an earlier question—I took a note of it—when he said that British firms "will be working". Is it clear, therefore, that work is going to be found for British firms in British factories? Have the Government made a calculation of the job prospects, and are they satisfied that smaller firms in this country will be able to compete with the large American firms? Does the agreement, albeit secret at this point, provide specifically that certain areas of the work will be carried out by British firms?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, there is already in the Library a document which refers to the specific areas where we believe British firms will have a particular interest and where, indeed, British firms and British institutions have a particular expertise. We naturally expect that British firms will make a major contribution in those areas. In that regard the noble Lord might care to study the document which is in the Library. It is not possible to exempt British firms entirely from the competitive process, but I am quite clear that they have such important and, in some cases, unique capabilities that it would be very surprising indeed if they did not secure a major part of this work. I am referring to the research, of course. We are at this moment embarked upon a research programme, and nothing more.

Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos

My Lords, in that case I think it is very important that the Minister should make it abundantly clear that there is no positive commitment at this stage and that the phrase he used earlier, that British firms "will be working", is not precise. In fact, what he said is that there are areas of interest and expertise; but he must be clear when he is at the Box that he makes a positive statement. I should be glad if he would withdraw what he said earlier, that British firms "will be working", because there is no certainty of that.

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, that is not quite correct, because there will be some areas of activity where British institutions or firms will be awarded sole-source contracts.

Lord Morris

My Lords, my noble friend said that he expected British firms to make a contribution. Can he possibly clarify the level of his expectations?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I think I have just answered that question in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn.

Lord Kennet

My Lords, is it not the case that the confidential agreements in the defence field made by the Attlee Government with the United States were supported by the Opposition?

Lord Trefgarne

My Lords, I wish this one was as well!