§ 2.45 p.m.
§ Lord Jenkins of Putney asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether Lord Henley's statement that Trident and its predecessor Polaris were and are "independent" nuclear deterrents (H.L. Deb. 11 th January, col. 175) is compatible with the Nassau Agreement; with the Trident Purchase Agreement; and with the extension on 30th December 1994 for a further 10 years of the amendment to the 1958 agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States for Co-operation in the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes (Cm. 2686).
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Henley)My Lords, the full operational independence of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent is not affected by any of the arrangements cited by the noble Lord.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, for the first time the noble Lord has used the words "operational independence". On a previous occasion I pointed out that there is a general interdependence which these 910 treaties confirm. Does he not agree with that? Has he seen the latest development along these lines, which was set out in a report in the Independent on Sunday whose front page was headed with the words:
US urges Britain to ditch Trident"?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I am aware of the newspaper article to which the noble Lord refers. If he is suggesting by that article that the United States is putting pressure on us to reduce our deterrent, I can only say that we have received no representations whatever from the US to reduce the size of our Trident deterrent, which will remain as the minimum deterrent necessary for the defence of this country. With regard to the independence of the nuclear deterrent, as I have made quite clear on previous occasions and as we made quite clear at Nassau and on subsequent occasions, our forces are committed to NATO, but we have reserved the right to use it independently should national interests so require.
§ Lord Williams of ElvelMy Lords, has the noble Lord had the opportunity to look at the definition of the word "independent" in the Oxford English Dictionary? If he has not, perhaps I may remind him that it says:
not depending on something else for its existence, validity, efficiency, operation or some other attribute; not contingent on or conditioned by anything else".Does the noble Lord believe that to be a fair description of the Trident fleet?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, the noble Lord's question is irrelevant and rather silly. The simple question is: can we or can we not use our independent nuclear deterrent? The simple answer is that we can: it is under the ultimate control of the Prime Minister at all times.
§ Lord Williams of ElvelMy Lords, if my question was silly, the noble Lord's response was ludicrous. Under what circumstances would the Prime Minister remove our Trident fleet from NATO and use it independently?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, I do not have to answer that question. The important point is that he can use it if the national interest so requires.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, does the Trident missile depend on United States' satellites for targeting? If that is so, and the United States refused to give access to its satellites, would our deterrent still be independent?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, the targeting is under our own control.
§ Lord Jenkins of PutneyMy Lords, is not the truth of the matter that "interdependence" is the right word to describe the position of Trident and to some extent of the American nuclear missiles as well? There is a large degree of interdependence. Is the noble Lord now prepared to admit that?
§ Lord HenleyMy Lords, since the 1958 agreement there has obviously been a considerable degree of 911 co-operation between both countries. But co-operation between the two countries does not affect the operational independence and the use of that weapon.