Tactical Air-to-Surface Missiles

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence – in the House of Commons am 12:00 am ar 17 Rhagfyr 1991.

Danfonwch hysbysiad imi am ddadleuon fel hyn

Photo of Mr Andrew Bennett Mr Andrew Bennett , Denton and Reddish 12:00, 17 Rhagfyr 1991

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects TASM to be in service; and where they will be based.

Photo of Mr Tom King Mr Tom King The Secretary of State for Defence

The WE177 free-fall bomb will be approaching the end of its service life around the turn of the century, but no decision has yet been taken on the system to replace it, or where it will be based.

Photo of Mr Andrew Bennett Mr Andrew Bennett , Denton and Reddish

In their discussions on the replacement system, have the Government talked to the German Government about the possibility of basing a new nuclear missile system in Germany? If not, when do the Government intend to have such discussions? Would not it be far better to seek an effective non-proliferation treaty than to go for a new generation of nuclear weapons?

Photo of Mr Tom King Mr Tom King The Secretary of State for Defence

I have just returned from a NATO meeting last week at which we agreed the military strategy that will accompany the strategic concept now agreed, of which Germany is a prominent supporter. NATO will continue to base effective and up-to-date sub-strategic nuclear forces in Europe. The alliance strategic concept, of which Germany is a strong supporter, makes that point clear.

Photo of Julian Brazier Julian Brazier , Canterbury

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the answer that he has just given is further reinforced by the fact that several third-world countries, including some middle eastern countries such as Iraq, Algeria and perhaps Libya, are currently acquiring nuclear weapons? For all those reasons, it is essential that we keep a sub-strategic nuclear system in western Europe.

Photo of Mr Tom King Mr Tom King The Secretary of State for Defence

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. Not only do we need a strategic deterrent, but there is a strong argument that a sub-strategic deterrent continues to be relevant at a time when there is a real risk of several new nations appearing which have some form of nuclear capability and when we risk the proliferation of not merely equipment but perhaps technology from some of the scientific bases in the former Soviet Union. My hon. Friend's point is very important.