§ 2.50 p.m.
§ Lord MolloyMy 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 whether they have been or will be fully consulted by the United States Government about the summit negotiations in Iceland on 10th and 11th October between President Reagan and Mr. Gorbachev.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Young)My Lords, we were informed in advance about the Reykjavik meeting, as part of the very close consultations between ourselves and the Americans. We will obviously let our United States allies know our views before the meeting takes place.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for that reply, which appears to mean that there were consultations and that consultations will continue after the meeting. Perhaps I may ask the noble Baroness whether it would be possible, in the interests of the nation and not merely those of this Chamber by itself, for us to have a Statement immediately the consultations between Mr. Gorbachev and President Reagan have been concluded, so that the nation may have some idea of the reaction of the British Government to the talks of our ally the United States with the Soviet Union's leader.
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I can confirm what the noble Lord said about the consultations that have taken place. I take note of the noble Lord's interest, in his supplementary question, about a Statement. It is unusual to make a Statement about a meeting at which Her Majesty's Government are not present. but we certainly wish to keep the House informed in an appropriate way.
§ Lord ThorneycroftMy Lords, do noble Lords agree that perhaps the less we ask in detail about consultations and the more we rely upon the standing, experience and reputation of the Prime Minister and her acknowledged friendship and loyalty to the United States, the more likely we are to be consulted?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I should like to thank my noble friend for the question that he has put to the House and to say that I think he has made a very important point. If I may say so to those sitting opposite, some of us who heard the anti-American remarks made at their party conference last week do not feel that those are in Britain's best interests.
§ Lord Cledwyn of PenrhosMy Lords, following that pre-conference encomium, may I say that we are delighted that this preliminary summit is to be held in Reykjavik? Will the noble Baroness confirm that the object of that meeting, so far as she is aware, following the consultations she has described, will be a conference to prepare an agenda? Is it the case that the agenda will go beyond disarmament and will include matters such as human rights, regional issues and so forth, as has been reported? Will she specifically confirm that Her Majesty's Government will particularly support a comprehensive test ban treaty? Will she confirm that that will be on the agenda?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I am very glad to hear from the noble Lord that he welcomes this meeting at Reykjavik, which we regard as a token of the wish of both sides for a full summit. We hope that that will take place in the United States this year, as agreed at Geneva last year. Quite specifically, both sides have made clear that regional issues will be on the agenda, and we hope as well for results on human rights. We hope that the meeting will lead to a productive summit meeting with substantial results in arms control, building on the earlier agreement at the Geneva summit and on the useful work which has been done since then by the negotiators in Geneva. Her Majesty's Government, in consultation with their allies, have made a positive and active contribution.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, when the noble Baroness speaks about consultations does that mean that we shall be told what line the President will take up at Reykjavik in regard. for example, to a matter which notably concerns us—namely, intermediate weapons? If we are being told what line he will take up, have we an opportunity of saying what we think on this very important subject?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I do not think that the noble Lord would expect me to go into detail, but, as he will know, there has always been close consultation between ourselves and the United States; and that applies at the present time. On the particular point he raises about INF and the United States proposal for 100 warheads in Europe, I cannot comment on the details of that proposal. It is fully consistent with agreed alliance policy, but there must be equal and global limits on warheads and appropriate constraints on shorter-range systems.
§ Lord KennetMy Lords, do the Government agree that the two national leaders are to be congratulated on having evaded the more or less transparent attempts of their subordinates on both sides to prevent them meeting and on the fact that they are actually getting on with the job?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I am sure that we are all glad that the meeting is taking place, and we hope for progress at it.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, as the Prime Minister will not be present at this meeting, are not the questions about her qualities—about which there may be more than one opinion—somewhat irrelevant to the Question on the Order Paper? Is it not the case that 8 nuclear weapons have never given us a place at the conference table and that in those circumstances they serve no useful purpose? Does the noble Baroness not agree that we should be much safer without them?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I do not accept that statement. If the noble Lord and his friends cared to consider the great dangers to which they are putting this country by their anti-nuclear policy, I think they would recognise that the overwhelming majority of the British people will be very frightened by it.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that, speaking as one who sits on the other side of the House, as she says, I believe there is no hope for the world unless Britain and America are acting as one and in concert, and that most of us who support the American alliance believe that this initiative has proved to some of its critics that America wants peace, just as we do?
§ Baroness YoungYes, my Lords. I think it is very reassuring to hear from the noble Lord on that point. It is important for the whole world that this meeting, at which we wish to see progress. is taking place.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, does the noble Baroness not agree that in the statement made by Mr. Neil Kinnock at the Labour Party Conference he declared emphatically that we are the firm allies of the United States of America? Is she further aware that on 30th March this House presaged the idea of what should take place in discussions which might ultimately bring the world away from the edge of total disaster? Therefore, if we are to have consultations with the Americans as our allies, we should seek some way, as swiftly as possible, of informing our nation. What we are really talking about in these negotiations is war and peace, and there may never be another opportunity to secure for all mankind a march towards peace rather than towards war.
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I am very unclear about the question that the noble Lord asked at the end of all that.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, may I—
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I remain unclear as to exactly the question that the noble Lord asked, but I comment on one point that he made in all that: that is, that it would be difficult for this country to remain a firm friend and ally of the Americans by pursuing policies which they would object to very strongly.
§ Lord GladwynMy Lords, will the noble Baroness give us an assurance that this House will have an opportunity of discussing the situation arising from the Reykjavik conference soon after it ends?
§ Baroness YoungMy Lords, I have already indicated, in an answer to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, the position about that. I am sure that what I have said has been taken note of by the usual channels and by the Leader of the House.