TNAG-2709-FCO40-3915-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-and-Par-1993 — Page 154

1219

French Nuclear Power: Cost

[LORDS]

[LORD DONOUGHUE] admit that they do not know the true costs of generating their nuclear power? We know that it is subsidised. Following her reply to my noble friend Lord Stoddart, does she agree that it gives a helpful indication of the value of that two-way trade of electricity between England and France to say that since the new interconnector was established in 1986, the French have sold to us 40 times what we have sold to them; and that since privatisation, we have sold virtually nothing to the French?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I repeat my first Answer, which I am sorry was not clear. The French estimate, with all the provisos to which the noble Lord drew attention, that the lifetime costs of a new PWR would be 2.7p per kilowatt hour. In a recent visit by my honourable friend Mr. Eggar to meet the French energy Minister, it was confirmed that the French welcome discussions in regard to the export of electricity to France on a commercial basis. Discussions are already taking place between EDF and a UK supplier.

Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that in order to keep a sense of proportion and balance, the commitment having been given regarding nuclear energy, it is appropriate also that some commitment should be given regarding the retention of our coal industry?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I draw my noble friend's attention to the fact that the Question relates to nuclear matters. I am sure that the coal review will answer his question.

Lord Eatwell: My Lords, will the Minister tell the House whether there are any plans to widen the current nuclear and coal reviews into a review of the criteria for the development of energy policy as a whole? Is not that the only rational way forward?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord will find that the review of the coal situation covers all aspects of energy.

Nuclear Weapons: Non-Proliferation

2.45 p.m.

Lord Mayhew asked Her Majesty's Government:

What proposals they have for preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey): My Lords, we attach the highest priority to preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. We participate actively in international efforts to that end. The most important instrument of the non-proliferation regime is the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. As a co-depositary of the treaty, we are working to secure its indefinite extension in 1995.

Lord Mayhew: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that reply. But why do the Government allow those admirable aims to be undermined by their nuclear weapons policy? How can other governments

626 LD75/2 Job 1-2

Nuclear Weapons: Non-Proliferation

1220

be expected to take seriously the views on non-proliferation of a government which are increasing the fire power of their strategic deterrent. designing a new additional nuclear missile system and opposing the comprehensive test ban treaty?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, we are not opposing the comprehensive test ban treaty. The non-proliferation treaty, as the noble Lord well knows, enhances the security of the parties by constraining the acquisition of nuclear weapons. That is why indefinite extension is in the interests of all parties, irrespective of a progress towards a comprehensive test ban. But the benefits of restraints on testing in countering proliferation must be examined carefully. I know that is an anxiety of the noble Lord.

In the past the ban on testing was seen as a means of restraining increases in the arsenals of superpowers. Those arsenals are now dramatically shrinking. The emphasis must be on preventing proliferation of nuclear weapons in other countries. We must be exceedingly careful. As I said in this House only last week, a determined proliferator could still produce and deploy crude nuclear weapons without first establishing their safety or reliability through testing.

Lord Jenkins of Putney: My Lords, in view of the Government's support of the non-proliferation treaty, perhaps I may ask this question. Why do they not do as their fellow nuclear superpowers do, with the sole exception of China, and give support to a comprehensive test ban? They say that they are not against it, yet they are not for it. Cannot the noble Baroness say that as from now Great Britain will join France, the United States of America and Russia in actively supporting and requiring a test ban treaty, and preferably one which will come into effect in 1996?

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, I made clear to the noble Lord last week that the Americans have not yet made up their minds. We are in close touch with them. I cannot add to what I have said. Many other critical aspects of the nuclear weapons question appear on our agenda, particularly North. Korea's decision of withdrawal from the non- proliferation treaty, which is of grave anxiety to us all.

Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, is it not absolutely plain that this problem, important though it is, is infinitely more complicated since the break up of the communist empire? So long as that remains the case, it must be in the interests of this country and the world that this country retains a cautious attitude towards rather quick-solving solutions.

Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: My Lords, my noble friend is absolutely right. We must be extremely cautious. However, we have sought to assist the former Soviet Union because the rapid and safe implementation of arms control obligations remains one of our highest priorities. We and our NATO allies were quick to offer our help with the elimination of nuclear weapons due for destruction in the former Soviet Union. We continue to seek to work with them.