would complement and strengthen a non-dissemination agreement. The United Kingdom believe that agreement is possible, and we would like to see the early start of constructive work in this Committee to that end. We believe that recent improvements in seismological techniques of detection and identification of underground nuclear tests should make it possible to provide for a smaller number of on-site inspections than we had earlier believed to be necessary.

As my Prime Minister said in the House of Commons on 6 July "we are not tied to a particular figure".(6) Given flexibility on both sides it should be possible to bridge the small remaining gap between the two sides.

Our scientists still believe that some on-site inspection is necessary, but they are ready to be convinced that it is not. Soviet scientists are able, we are told, to detect and identify "all” underground nuclear explosions without fail. If this is so, it seems to us, as to so many other delegations who spoke on this subject in New York, that the obviously sensible course is to allow Western and Soviet scientists to meet to produce an agreed technical assessment of current detection and identification capabilities. There is surely nothing to lose and everything to gain. I wholeheartedly endorse what the distinguished representative of the United States, Mr. Foster, said at our meeting two days ago:

"The United States continues to be willing to explore what would constitute an adequate verification system in the light of recent and prospective developments in our capabilities. If such exploration indicates that verification requirements can be satisfied by a different number and type of inspection from those previously proposed, we will take those facts into account. We invite other countries to submit any data or research results which may be helpful to this end."

It is only the Soviet Government which so far refuses to allow such expert discussion and I very much hope that they will yield to the pressure of international opinion on this issue.

3. MULTILATERAL NUCLEAR FORCE, 12TH AUGUST, 1965.(7)

I feel it necessary once more to set the record straight about the proposals for the Atlantic Nuclear Force now being discussed (6) H.C. Deb. Vol. 715, col. 1342.

(7) Miscellaneous No. 8 (1966) (Cmnd. 3020), Speech 34.

within the Western Alliance. They do not-and my Government is determined that they never will-include any element of dissemination. While I do not expect this argument to be accepted by the Soviet Union in its present mood, I think it must be clear to any reasonable person that the creation of the Atlantic Nuclear Force would not give to West Germany or to any other member of the Western Alliance any more power than it has at present to initiate the use of nuclear weapons. On the contrary, the proposal involves the assumption by those non-nuclear Powers of the Western Alliance taking part in the new arrangements of the power to prevent but not to authorise the firing of a nuclear weapon. This is, indeed, a principle which should be instantly familiar to the Soviet Union. It is the principle of their old friend the right of veto, as exercised in the Security Council of the United Nations.

On this matter I should like to ask some very clear questions of Mr. Tsarapkin and the other representatives of the Communist countries represented here. Do they really object to the possibility of an arrangement within the Western Alliance that will, so far from transferring the control of nuclear weapons to nonnuclear countries, in fact extend the right of veto? Do they really object to the placing of more fingers on the safety-catch of the nuclear weapon? Can they really describe this as dissemination of nuclear weapons, and is this what they mean when they talk of giving West Germany access to those weapons? If so, then I can only say that I entirely fail to understand the logic of their approach.

Indeed, I suspect that the Soviet Union knows quite well that the Atlantic Nuclear Force contains no measure of dissemination but is itself a measure designed to prevent it. I suspect that its fears are of another sort and that they would exist whether an A.N.F. were under discussion in the Western Alliance or not. Indeed, if he will forgive me for doing so, I should like to quote Mr. Lobodycz, the representative of Poland, to show that he himself apparently stops short of asserting that the A.N.F. is disseminatory. He argued:

"Furthermore, the setting up of the Multilateral or Atlantic Nuclear Force with the participation of the Federal Republic of Germany would grant a premium to the most aggressive political forces in West Germany for their unyielding position

and pressure for access to nuclear weapons. Such a move would encourage these forces and would be a starting-point for their continued claims in the nuclear field".(8)

The fear seems to be, not that the A.N.F. is in itself disseminatory, but that West Germany has nuclear ambitions which the A.N.F. will not satisfy.

So far as Her Majesty's Government is concerned, I can only repeat with all the vigour at my command that we shall never consent to taking part in any nuclear sharing arrangement within the Western Alliance that will involve placing the control of nuclear weapons in the hands of any non-nuclear country, including those of West Germany. And I think I should make it clear that in any case Her Majesty's Government emphatically rejects the accusations that have been made against the West German Government in this context. It is worth pointing out, I think, that no other state has gone so far as to renounce the manufacture of atomic, bacteriological and chemical weapons on its territory. No other state is subject to the same military threat as is posed by the numerous Warsaw Pact divisions in the Soviet zone of Germany, and the hundreds of medium-range ballistic missiles targeted on West Germany from bases in West Russia. It is greatly to the credit of the West German Government that, in the face of such a threat, it has preferred to seek security within the Western Alliance and to take part in the measures of nuclear sharing now proposed within NATO rather than engage in a nuclear weapons programme of its own.

There is one other misconception which I think it would be as well to correct, and that is the idea, also put forward by Mr. Lobodycz, that the setting up of an Allied Atlantic Nuclear Force is incompatible with the aim of reducing nuclear weapons to lower and safer levels. It is of course a familiar and complete fallacy to suggest that the A.N.F. involves the creation of additional nuclear strength. As my Prime Minister said in the House of Commons on 16 December 1964:

"If the total Western missile strength were increased, I would further say that we would assume a corresponding reduction in total national missile strengths, so we are not talking about adding to the West's total missile strength".(")

(8) Ibid., Speech No. 32. (9) Vol. 167, page 455.

The A.N.F. proposals now being discussed within the Western Alliance, as conceived by the British Government, envisage establishing a control system over existing nuclear delivery systems. There is no incompatibility, therefore, between this and my suggestion, which I repeat, that the nuclear Powers should be thinking seriously about halting and eventually putting into reverse the present nuclear arms race.

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH on the Closing of Parliament.— Westminster, 8th November, 1965

My Lords and Members of the House of Commons

My Husband and I were glad to welcome to this country the President of Chile and Señora de Frei.

We were touched by the warmth of our reception during our State Visit to the Federal Republic of Germany. We also have vivid memories of our friendly welcome in Ethiopia and the Sudan.

It was with great pleasure that I welcomed in London in June the Heads of Government or their representatives from all the member countries of the Commonwealth. This was the first Meeting of Commonwealth Prime Ministers to be attended by the President of Zambia and the Prime Ministers of Malta and of The Gambia. My Government welcomed the decisions to establish the Commonwealth Secretariat and the Commonwealth Foundation.

My Government have continued to work for peace and understanding in international relations. They have striven to promote the stability of South-East Asia, in particular, by seeking a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Vietnam. To this end the Commonwealth Prime Ministers at their Meeting in June appointed a Commonwealth Peace Mission.

My Government have taken practical steps to resolve difficulties at the United Nations and to support United Nations peacekeeping and economic and social work.

My Government were much concerned at the recent outbreak of hostilities between our two Commonwealth partners, India and Pakistan. They have throughout given full support to the

efforts of the United Nations Secretary-General and the Security Council which, aided by the wise statesmanship of the leaders of both countries, have led to the achievement of a cease-fire.

My Ministers have played their full part in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and our other alliances for collective defence. They have been active in seeking progress towards disarmament and the non-dissemination of nuclear weapons.

My Government have continued to co-operate in strengthening the European Free Trade Association and have made proposals to bring about closer co-operation between the Association and the European Economic Community.

My Government are happy that the new State of Singapore has become a member of the Commonwealth.

My Government have established a new Ministry to administer our technical aid and economic aid to the developing nations. The first Commonwealth Medical Conference has been held in Edinburgh.

My Government have continued their unremitting efforts to bring about through negotiation a peaceful and honourable solution in Rhodesia on a basis acceptable to the people of the country as a whole.

Members of the House of Commons

I thank you for the provision which you have made for the public services.

My Lords and Members of the House of Commons

My Government's first aim has been to restore the balance in our external payments and maintain the strength of sterling. New schemes to help exporters have been introduced. My Ministers have continued to play a full part in the discussions on international liquidity and an Act has been passed to enable the United Kingdom to give effect to the decision to raise members' quotas in the International Monetary Fund.

Important reforms have been effected in the taxation of companies and capital gains, and improvements have been made in the control of public expenditure.