The UK Biological Weapons Program - Deadly Cultures: Biological Weapons Since 1945 - page 80

In the wake of this discussion, a variety of funding sources for the
MRE was considered, such as the University of Southampton Medical
School, the Home Office, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Technology, the
National Research Development Council, the Science Research Council,
the Ministry for Overseas Development, and the Medical Research Coun-
cil (MRC). 135 Of these, the proposal to the Medical Research Council ap-
pears to have been most vigorously pursued within the Ministry of De-
fence, although there is evidence that this move was regarded by the
Chiefs of Staff as a “bluff” that they thought would fail and thus al-
low them to maintain control of the establishment. 136 The chief scientific
advisor, Solly Zuckerman, made a number of unsuccessful approaches
to the secretary of the MRC, Harold Himsworth. Zuckerman conveyed
Himsworth's reasons directly to the secretary of state for defence, Dennis
Healey:
Himsworth's general line is that it is not the policy of the MRC to dabble
in affairs that are not designed to improve health, and that they are also
in general averse to secret work...they would not only be going against
one of their principles, but might also be damaging their “image” in
countries overseas, which assume they have nothing to do with matters
relating to defence and, in particular, with subjects like microbiological
and chemical warfare. 137
Other efforts to “civilianize” the MRE in the UK continued unsuc-
cessfully alongside cutbacks in defense expenditure. Furthermore, at this
time Britain took a lead role in proposing a new Biological Warfare Con-
vention to the Eighteen Nation Committee on Disarmament. The details
of the UK's involvement are discussed elsewhere. 138 The Ministry of De-
fence was less enthusiastic about the convention than the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office. Probably as a result, the ministry predicted that
the impending treaty would have little impact on BW research. In 1968
the secretary of state for defence reported to the Cabinet Defence and
Overseas Policy Committee that “we have stated clearly on a number of
occasions that, in the field of BW, we are concerned only with devising ef-
fective means of defence. Our position is not affected by the recent UK
initiative in the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee . . . The terms
of any such agreement consistent with the UK initiative, would not pre-