Proceeding contribution from Lord Archer of Sandwell (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 24 January 2007. It occurred during Debate on Armed Forces: Nuclear Deterrent.
Armed Forces: Nuclear Deterrent
My Lords, as I understand it, that question arose then because it appeared that compliance with Article VI was in some doubt in a number of places. The greatest danger would have been if the treaty had disappeared altogether, before Article VI had been complied with. It was still, as I understand it, intended to fill a gap, however long that continued. I cannot believe that the non-nuclear states believed that they would have had second-class status ““Forever and a day””, as the hymn puts it. It is as though Parliament, when creating the offence of carrying an offensive weapon, had exempted those who were already carrying one. The preamble to the treaty exhibits a clear sense of urgency, with the words: "““Declaring their intention to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race””." The non-nuclear states have for some years shown signs of impatience that the nuclear-weapons states have exhibited no great anxiety to deliver on that part of the deal. Until now, as my noble friend Lord Drayson said, the United Kingdom could at least claim that it had substantially reduced its nuclear weaponry and was therefore moving towards disarmament, but to make a major investment in replacing Trident would send a clear signal that we see the treaty, with its class distinction, not as an interim arrangement but as, at best, indefinite and, at worst, permanent. I had hoped to respond to my noble friend Lord Foulkes’s mistaken view, as I believe it to be, that there has been no ruling on the legitimacy of nuclear weapons. I fear that he and I will have to decide that over a drink later, because time is against me. I do not believe that anyone is going to emulate this country, whatever it does, purely because we have taken a particular view. I do believe that many people and many states have looked to this country because of its leadership again and again in these matters and have regarded it as one of the great hopes for one day achieving total nuclear disarmament. That is the laurel that they bestow on the teams from this country. I believe that if the decision is taken in the way that the Government propose, there will be many very disappointed people out there.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 688 c1149-50
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Costs Arms control International cooperation Nuclear weapons Nuclear fuels Procurement Proliferation Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Terrorism USA Trident submarines Iran Nuclear submarines North Korea Guided weapons Trident Cruise missiles
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 11:20:18 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372571
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372571
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_372571