As a member of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) I have a particular concern for the peace of the world. As a teacher of secondary aged school-children, I am interested in ensuring that future generations have a fulfilled and healthy life. For these reasons, I am keen for the government to fulfil its frequently-expressed commitment to world-wide nuclear disarmament. The UK government is well-placed to take a lead in this area.

  I was very concerned at reports in the Guardian (14 January 2000) that the Russian Acting President Vladimir Putin has unilaterally decreed a new national security strategy which lowers the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. In his move to permit the use of nuclear weapons in response to a conventional attack, he is of course following NATO's lead; he is also responding to the Russian perception that the USA aim to use its military power for world domination. Surely it is time for the UK to use its influence here, both in regard to NATO policy and the activities of the USA.

  As you know, there are a number of international treaties which attempt to ensure global security by limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons and banning nuclear testing.

  On the question of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, there is no room for complacency. Since the last major NPT Review Conference in 1995, India and Pakistan, not signatories to the NPT, have both tested nuclear devices. It is highly likely that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea aspire to become nuclear capable. China has modernised her nuclear arsenals and Russia has tested new TOPOL missiles.

  On the question of nuclear testing, the CTBT suffered a severe blow by the refusal of the US last October to ratify it. It was good to see UK pressure on the US to ratify, and the unprecedented cross-party support for the relevant Early Day Motion showed the strong feeling amongst our MPs. I hope very much that our government will maintain its pressure on the US to ratify the Treaty.

  It is unlikely that India and Pakistan will sign the NPT, and non-nuclear NPT signatories are increasingly unlikely to abide by it, until they see some movement from the nuclear states to honour their agreements under Article 6 to "pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament". I trust that our government will bear this Article in mind when considering our own defence policy and when discussing nuclear issues with its allies. One clear area where this is relevant is in the activities at Menwith Hill, which is being used by the USA to provide essential communication systems for its planned Ballistic Missile Defence System, which contravenes the ABM Treaty and threatens a new arms race.

  I greatly welcome the announcement in the Labour Party's Strategic Defence Review (1997) that the expertise of Aldermaston would be used partly to develop effective verification and monitoring. This is a constructive and useful way to use the knowledge which has been built up over the decades, and prevents reluctant governments from using lack of verification and monitoring as an excuse not to sign or abide by treaties.

  If we want to encourage non-signatory states, the best way is clearly by complying with both the spirit and the letter of treaties to which the UK is signatory. We do not have a choice between proliferation and non-proliferation, but between proliferation and disarmament. I urge our government to take a lead in this matter.