Proceeding contribution from Cathy Jamieson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 18 May 2011. It occurred during Ministerial statement on Nuclear Deterrent.
Nuclear Deterrent
Does the Secretary of State understand that many people will find it shocking that we are talking about value for money in the context of weapons of mass destruction, for which no moral case can be made? May I press him further on the point made earlier in relation to deterrence? Surely if something is to act as a deterrent, there must be a reasonable assumption that at some stage it may be used. What are the circumstances in which the Secretary of State would sanction the use of nuclear weapons? If he cannot give a straight answer to that, is it not time for the UK to move towards disarming and not to replace Trident?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 528 c362
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Costs Nuclear weapons Procurement Nuclear disarmament Safety Nuclear submarines
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:22:37 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743939
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743939
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_743939