§ 3.1 p.m.
§ Lord Jenkins of Putney asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether they will discontinue the practice of answering any Question on nuclear weapons by saying that the United Kingdom's nuclear weapons make a continuing contribution to maintaining stability in Europe when that question has not been raised.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Henley)My Lords, we will continue to give Answers which are appropriate to the Questions we are asked.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, I wish that I could ask the noble Lord to keep more closely in future 387 to the promise that he has just made to me than has been the case in the past. I have asked him two Questions about Trident, to which he replied:
Our … forces make a continuing contribution to maintaining stability in Europe".I also asked a separate Question about the development of Trident, to which he replied that our weapons,make a continuing contribution to maintaining stability in Europe".—[Official Report, 15/3/95; col. WA 48.]That may be a matter of opinion, but in neither case is it an Answer to the Question that was asked.
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I believe that those are very good Answers to the Questions put by the noble Lord. We all know that the noble Lord does not believe in our nuclear deterrent and we all know that the noble Lord wishes to discredit our nuclear deterrent. I happen to disagree with the noble Lord—and to disagree with him pretty fundamentally. If he wishes to discredit our nuclear deterrent by asking Questions phrased in a certain way, which I believe that he wishes to do, I seek to reserve my right—and it is my right—to answer them as is appropriate to ensure that Her Majesty's Government's position is correctly stated and made absolutely clear.
§ Lord Boyd-CarpenterMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the Answer to which the noble Lord objects is, in fact, the answer to his Question? May I express the hope that my noble friend will go on repeating it until eventually, we hope, the noble Lord begins to understand it?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for that question. I was hoping that I would not have to repeat the Answer that long because I was hoping that the noble Lord would stop asking his Question.
§ Lord JuddMy Lords, whatever may be the stereotype form of Answers to Questions in this House, have the Government yet had time to consider the call made by the Secretary General this weekend for the only sane objective of total global nuclear disarmament and for an immediate halt to production and testing? How does the Government's policy of doubling the number of warheads on Trident as compared with Polaris begin to meet that objective? Are the Government now ready lo include Trident in any future five-power arms control negotiations?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, the noble Lord knows full well that we are fully committed to securing an unconditional and indefinite extension of the non-proliferation treaty, which started yesterday. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary will be speaking in New York this afternoon on that very subject. Perhaps I can put the noble Lord right on one small matter. The noble Lord talked about increasing our nuclear arsenal; I can assure him that when Trident takes over the sub-strategic role and when the WE177 bomb is withdrawn, the United Kingdom will have 21 388 per cent, fewer nuclear warheads than in the 1970s and the total explosive power of those warheads will be some 59 per cent, lower than the 1970s figure.
§ Lord JuddMy Lords, will the Minister clarify one point? Is it not the case that when Trident is in place there will be double the number of warheads available in Trident as compared with those available in Polaris?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, we are maintaining a minimum deterrent. What I have made clear is that, overall, the number of our nuclear warheads will be some 21 per cent, fewer and the total explosive power of those warheads will be some 59 per cent, lower than in the 1970s.
§ Lord ReaMy Lords, in the current discussions in New York on the extension of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, what is the Government's position with regard to a comprehensive nuclear test ban, which many non-nuclear powers regard as an important indication on the part of the nuclear powers that they are serious about nuclear disarmament?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, we shall continue to play a constructive and positive part in the negotiations for the comprehensive test ban treaty. We have dropped our requirement for exceptional safety tests, but we shall not sacrifice a good treaty for a quick one. I do not believe that there is any necessary linkage between the comprehensive test ban treaty and the extension of the non-proliferation treaty.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, if the Answer given by my noble friend is factually right and represents the attitude of government, what conceivable objection is there to the form of that Answer?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I have to say to my noble friend that I do not know what the answer is, but I tend to agree with everything that my noble friend said.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, will the noble Lord introduce novelty into the proceedings? We all know his opinions on these matters and I have no doubt that he speaks for the Government in this respect, but would it not be a good idea—just try it out once or twice—to answer the Question on the Order Paper?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I do answer the Question and give the views of Her Majesty's Government, just as the noble Lord gives what I imagine are his own views.
Earl Alexander of TunisMy Lords, has not the fact that we have enjoyed peace for the past 50 years itself allowed the noble Lord to put his Question?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, my noble friend is absolutely correct. I fear to think what might have happened if we had pursued some of the policies suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Jenkins.
Lord Bruce of DoningtonMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that he may have set an undesirable precedent in his original Answer to my noble friend, which would indicate to the House that where the Government do not like the Question or the philosophy of the questioner, they reserve the right to avoid 389 answering specific questions? Will the Minister give the House an assurance that when it comes to matters affecting the EC, he will not follow a similar tactic?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, dare I say it, nonsense. As I said in my original Answer, we will give Answers which are appropriate to the Questions that are asked.