Skip to main content

Oral question asked in the House of Commons, by Jeremy Corbyn (Labour). It was answered on Monday, 19 December 2011 on behalf of the Ministry of Defence.


Trident

Question
By the Minister's own figures, the Government are proposing to spend £5 billion on the submarine replacement and the preparations for a new missile system from AWE Aldermaston, which means that after the next election the new Parliament will be confronted with the decision whether to renew the Trident system, having already spent £5 billion on it. Does the Minister not think that we are walking—indeed, sleepwalking—into a massive expenditure, after that, of £25 billion on a replacement, plus the running costs? Is it not time we brought this vanity project to an end and cancelled the Trident system?
Answer

No, I do not think that at all. In fact, not spending that money would prevent us from preserving the option for the next Parliament to take the decision. The hon. Gentleman is fond of pointing out the problems in respect of the capability for the nuclear deterrent, but let me assure him that the work we are undertaking will have benefits for other classes of nuclear submarines in future— particularly in respect of the primary propulsion systems, for example with the PWR3. There are real benefits from doing this work—not just for the security of the nation in the short term, but for the long term as well.


Secondary information

Type
Oral question
Reference
537 c1044 
Session
2010-12
Oral question type
1st Supplementary
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Trident
Link
View this Oral question on www.publications.parliament.uk