Written question asked by Dan Jarvis (Labour) on Wednesday, 6 July 2011, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Monday, 11 July 2011. It was answered by Lord Robathan (Conservative) on Monday, 11 July 2011 on behalf of the Ministry of Defence.

Trident

Question: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 28 June 2011, Official Report, column 675W, on Trident, whether he has assessed options for an alternative to the replacement of Trident that would provide an equivalent level of deterrence.

Answer: The 2006 White Paper 'The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent' (Cm 6994) set out the results of a fundamental analysis of options for any successor deterrent system. This work concluded that a minimum nuclear deterrent based on a new generation of ballistic missile-carrying submarines operating a continuous at sea deterrence posture was right for the UK. As set out in the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review (Cm 7948), and as the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox), reiterated in his statement to the House on 18 May 2011, Official Report, columns 351-353, this remains Government policy.As the Secretary of State for Defence explained in his answer of 28 June 2011, the study to assist the Liberal Democrats in making the case for alternatives will review the costs, feasibility and credibility of alternative platforms, alternative delivery systems and alternative postures.

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 65499; 531 c51W
Session: 2010-12
Related items: Trident
Tuesday, 28 June 2011
Written questions
House of Commons
Subjects: Trident
Link: View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk