https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/c50aa990c0f96588274eea184edf94e3.pdf b5caac77ea48d2b79b462ac1e66e94ed PDF Text Text Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a I'information S E C R E T 6 December 1957. The Minister Special Tripartite Maetlnga in Washington - Third Report 1. Tbe Sub-Committee on Biological,JlariiQloglgal and Chemical Hartm** n»t on the morning of 5 December 1957. The UBItecTKingdom representative opened the meeting by pointing out that In this area most excellent cooperation had taken place over a number of years, but in view of the United Kingdom urgent need for reallocation of effort, the purpose of the meeting should be to examine possible further cooperation among the three countries. It was pointed out that the United Kingdom had excellent researoh faoilities at Porton manned by competent staffs, but that the United States had a major advantage in its development and production capabilities and Canada had unique field testing facilities. Xt, therefore, appeared reasonable to examine ways and means of sharing the workload more intimately. For example, the United Kingdom might concentrate /predominantly on research, Canada on field trials and the United I States on production. " The Canadian representative outlined the Canadian position and stressed that the closest of tripartite cooperation existed in the area of research and field trials. Specific attention was drawn to the Suffield field trial capabilities, the Grosse Isle anti-animal biological warfare activities, and the Canadian capabilities in chemical, biological and radiological research to Include chemical warfare agent research, medical chemical warfare research and flame warfare research and development.. It was pointed out that Canada is at the moment actively re-examining the chemical, biological and radiological portion of the researoh development programme. The United States representative agreed that there was no doubt that the United Kingdom capabilities at Porton were excellent but that the extent of the Porton work was not more than ten percent of the United States research effort and that there was no munition development work going on in the United Kingdom. He readily agreed that the Suffield facilities uere unique and especially valuable for cold weather, but he stressed that the United States Duguay Plant was larger and considerably more highly instrumented. As regards Grosse Isle, he stated that the capabilities were limited and for this reason the United States had at one time operated their own facility at Plum Island for anti-animal work. He noted that at this tims the United States had, by national authority, no offensive or defensive programme in this field. The United States representative continued by questioning how much more could be achieved In view of the already existing close cooperation. The United States and the United Kingdom representatives disoussed the feasibility of exchanging research workers amongst the countries without arriving at any firm conclusions. The United Kingdom representative stated that the impending United Kingdom cuts in the chemical, biological and radiological field wsre due to a lack of military demand. The United States representative pointed out that lt was true that financial cut backs were taking place but in recent months he had observed a growing interest in the chemical, biological and radiological field and expected this to reach a peak in three to five years. He believed this was due to a growing reluctance to use nuclear weapons which could in turn result in a lack of suitable warheads for missiles unless biological warfare and chemical warfare were employed. The United States representative went *./2 000351 �Document disclosed under the Access to Information Act Document divulgue en vertu de la Loi sur I'acces a I'information - 2 on to say that within a very few years biological warfare and chemical warfare areas of effectiveness would exceed those of comparable sized nuolear warheads. He summarized by stressing that to let efforts drop in the chemical, biological and radiological field, as was apparently happening in the United Kingdom, was to court national disaster and even perhaps international failure* The United Kingdom representative was unable to detect a comparable increase" in interest in the United Kingdom but personally considered It a pity to let the Porton facilities disappear and felt that close coordination of effort might keep them alive. The Canadian representative stated that no actual cut back in Canada had occurred but that the demand for increased research effort in other Important defence fields would be leading to a more critical examination of what the Defence Research Board was doing in the chemloal, biological and radiological field. The need to keep abreast of current developments was not questioned but the cost of Suffield appeared out of line unless it was required on a tripartite basis. As a result of considerable discussion it was concluded that the recent tripartite toxicologlcal conference had in fact divided the programmes among the three countries and until the main committee had studied the report of that conference there was no need for further effort to effect fuller cooperation except possibly In the area of radiological defence. Tn this field it was recommended and agreed that Canadian contact officers would in cooperation with appropriate United States agencies carefully examine coordination In this field. In this matter the representative of the United States Atomic Energy Commission agreed that the Atomic Energy Commission should willingly participate in this examination. The Canadian representatives noted a large difference between the United States and the United Kingdom appreciations of Russian Involvement In the chemical warfare and biological warfare field. The United States held ths view that Russian use on an intercontinental basis was probable and the United Kingdom view was that this was not so. In this connection the United Kingdom views approximated those of the Canadian views. 2. The Sub-Comalttees on %nfra-red Detection.and Thermionic Tubes also met on the morning of iTBeSelmbef3957. The scope of the discussion dealt with areas within suoh information should be exchanged and programmes coordinated. No detailed items were mentioned other than very high power radar tube requirements. It was agreed that a tripartite group will meet and examine the whole thermionic tube area whieh will include solid state devices but not infra-red detectors. This body would-be recruited from the national coordinating bodies which already have some degree of liaison. These are the eoimalttee on valve development for the United Kingdom, the advisory group on electron tubes for the United States and the electronic components development oonsslttee for Canada. It was also agreed that a second tripartite group will consider infira-red detectors and while the United States representatives for this group will come from the United States advisory group on electronic tubes the United Kingdom and Canada will have to appoint people from outside their corresponding organizations. In connection with both these proposed groups the Ohlted Kingdom representative pointed out the desirability of making contact with important work known to be going on In other countries such as at the Philips Company In Eindhoven and Compagnie General de Telegraphie sans Pils In Paris. However, the United States representative proposed that any such action ahould be delayed until the tripartite groups have met. /?' I y /ly^Y 1 ' (Charles Foulkes) General, hairman, Chiefs of Staff. 000352 i � Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDNW01254 Title A name given to the resource Memorandum for the Minister Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 12/6/1957 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived "Canada/US Agreement for Cooperation concerning military aspects of atomic energy." RG25-A-3-b, vol. 5957, 50219-AK-40, part 1, Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Department of External Affairs Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Canadian Crown Subject The topic of the resource Atomic energy cooperation Description An account of the resource Special Tripartite Meetings in Washington - Third Report Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Canada Declassified Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en