I wish to submit the following comments:

(a)  The Labour Government has often claimed its commitment to world-wide nuclear disarmament. Britain could and should take a lead in this.

(b)  Nuclear disarmament is too important to be taken lightly or be neglected. Since the 1995 NPT Review Conference, India and Pakistan have tested nuclear devices, Iraq, Iran and North Korea are thought to be close to nuclear capability. Russia has tested new TOPOL missiles, China, is modernising her nuclear capacity and the USA is weakening its commitment to nuclear disarmament.

(c)  The new acting Russian President has declared a new national security strategy which may prove more confrontational to the West.

(d)  India and Pakistan seem reluctant to sign the NPT. Unless nuclear states who are signed up to the NPT honour their agreements and take a lead in disarmament, then non-NPT signatories are not likely to sign up.

(e)  It is vital that the UK pressures the USA to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and that the UK does not allow the US to expand its base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire.

(f)  The UK could unblock progress towards a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty by agreeing to allow current stocks of plutonium to be covered by the Treaty. To not do this would call into question the seriousness of a desire for nuclear disarmament. The Labour Party's decision in the 1997 Strategic Defence Review to allow Aldermaston expertise to be used to develop effective verification and monitoring regimes for treaties is welcomed and encouraging.

  The best way to persuade non-signatory states is by complying with both the spirit and the letter of treaties to which the UK is a signatory. The choice is not between proliferation and non-proliferation but between proliferation and disarmament.

  I would like my comments to be taken into account by the Select Committee and the Government. I would also welcome the Government's comments on all the above points and its intentions to act upon all these issues.

31 January 2000