1-20 of 24 results for subject:Trident
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.222 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Trident
- We searched for
- subject_t:Trident OR subject_ses:13379
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
Publisher
That this House recognises the sacrifice made by the submariners of Her Majesty’s Royal Navy and the dedication of shipwrights and craftsmen across the United Kingdom in constructing and maintaining the Royal Navy submarines in which they serve; commemorates the fiftieth anniversary of UK continuous at-sea deterrence, known as Operation Relentless, which has maintained a nuclear deterrent patrol round the clock since April 1969; calls for formal recognition of their service with the introduction of a special service medal for all former and current submariners who have served on patrol in the ongoing Operation Relentless; and further calls on the Government to establish a working group to work with the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals to introduce this medal.
That this House recognises the sacrifice made by the submariners of Her Majesty’s Royal Navy and the dedication of shipwrights and craftsmen across the United Kingdom in constructing and maintaining the Royal Navy submarines in which they serve; commemorates the fiftieth anniversary of UK continuous at-sea deterrence, known as Operation...
The Secretary of State was obviously missed at our CASD reception, but we understand that he had a rather important emergency Cabinet meeting and noted that when he emerged from it, he remained as the Defence Secretary, which was helpful. Will he pay tribute from the Dispatch Box to the work that has gone into ensuring that we have had the continuation of the deterrent for 50 years, and does he agree that the problems with the refits make it all the more important that we deliver Dreadnought on time?
The Secretary of State was obviously missed at our CASD reception, but we understand that he had a rather important emergency Cabinet meeting and noted that when he emerged from it, he remained as the Defence Secretary, which was helpful. Will he pay tribute from the Dispatch Box to the work that has gone into ensuring that we have had the continuation of the deterrent for 50 years, and does he agree that the problems with the refits make it all the more important that we deliver Dreadnought on time?
I formally offer my apologies for not being able to attend the reception, which I sadly had to miss, but I look forward to attending a future one, and I would like to formally record my thanks to the men and women of Barrow, who have continuously worked so hard to provide us with the world’s cutting-edge submarine technology. Like the hon. Gentleman, I was very proud when I went through Barrow to see those Astute class submarines and the Dreadnought being built. It is absolutely integral to our national security. This is not just about the Royal Navy, but about the whole industrial supply chain all pulling together to make sure that Dreadnought is delivered on time and in budget.
Whoever stands at the Opposition Dispatch Box or at the Government’s, there is a cast iron majority in the House to do the right thing by Trident’s successor and to reach outwards to defend our nation, rather than to turn inwards. Will the vote still happen before the summer recess?
Whoever stands at the Opposition Dispatch Box or at the Government’s, there is a cast iron majority in the House to do the right thing by Trident’s successor and to reach outwards to defend our nation, rather than to turn inwards. Will the vote still happen before the summer recess?
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. There is clearly a majority—[Interruption.] There are those who are opposed in principle, but there is clearly such a majority in this House. I believe that it is right that this House should
vote on the principle of the renewal of the deterrent, and I very much hope that he will not have too much longer to wait.
May I tell the Secretary of State how much I enjoyed our exchange of letters during the election campaign—less so the 20,000 letters he sent to my constituents? Now that he has finished unsettling the carefully constructed supply chain, will he give a statement on the timetable for maingate? Is there a prospect of bringing it forward?
May I tell the Secretary of State how much I enjoyed our exchange of letters during the election campaign—less so the 20,000 letters he sent to my constituents? Now that he has finished unsettling the carefully constructed supply chain, will he give a statement on the timetable for maingate? Is there a prospect of bringing it forward?
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on surviving the election campaign. It is good to see him back in his place; indeed, it is good to hear him championing the renewal of the nuclear deterrent. I hope he will continue to do so throughout this Parliament. We expect the maingate decision to be taken in this Parliament—next year, I hope.
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost of the preparation of the Trident Alternatives Review was.
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost of the preparation of the Trident Alternatives Review was.
I have been asked to reply as the Minister responsible for the Trident Alternatives Review.
The costs of the review were met from within existing departmental budgets. They were limited to: the time spent by officials in the Cabinet Office leading the review, which over the past year consisted of two full-time staff and a senior civil servant; the time spent by experts providing advice on an as-required basis, primarily from the Ministry of Defence and from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office; and to any incidental travel costs associated with attending meetings.
These costs are not centrally recorded and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Is the right hon. Gentleman keeping an open mind about the timetable? If experts and the industry tell him that there could be a more cost-effective solution for the taxpayer if the main-gate decision were to come earlier than the scheduled date of 2016, will he be alive to that, rather than sticking to the current agreement within the coalition?
Is the right hon. Gentleman keeping an open mind about the timetable? If experts and the industry tell him that there could be a more cost-effective solution for the taxpayer if the main-gate decision were to come earlier than the scheduled date of 2016, will he be alive to that, rather than sticking to the current agreement within the coalition?
Tempting though it is to go down the route that the hon. Gentleman sets out, the reality is that the processes that must be undertaken to reach a mature main-gate decision that is properly informed by the evidence simply could not be shortened to the available time scale. We are aiming for 2016, by when we will have a robust basis on which to contract and to conduct the value-for-money assessment.
Agreed to on question.
Agreed to on question.
Does “shortly” mean before the summer recess? Given that the Deputy Prime Minister’s report will show that his grand idea of a mini-deterrent was always a complete fantasy, why should anyone take him seriously if he now says that Britain could be adequately protected with a part-time deterrent?
Does “shortly” mean before the summer recess? Given that the Deputy Prime Minister’s report will show that his grand idea of a mini-deterrent was always a complete fantasy, why should anyone take him seriously if he now says that Britain could be adequately protected with a part-time deterrent?
We have another psychic telling us what is in a report that he has not seen yet. We hope that the report will be published shortly; we hope to publish it before the recess, but of course we need to check that the unclassified document is properly vetted in all respects, which is what we are doing at the moment. The simple point is: does the hon. Gentleman believe that a weapons system designed to be fired at the push of a button, at any minute of any hour of any day, 365 days a week, to flatten Moscow in a cold war context, is the only weapons system available to us? That is the question he needs to answer.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the cost of operation of a continuous at-sea deterrent replacement system over the likely lifespan of such a system.
[133833]
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the cost of operation of a continuous at-sea deterrent replacement system over the likely lifespan of such a system.
[133833]
[holding answer 18 December 2012]: As stated in the White Paper, The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent (Cm 6994) published in December 2006, we expect that once the new successor
nuclear deterrent submarine comes into service the in-service costs of the UK's nuclear deterrent, which will include Atomic Weapons Establishment's costs, will be similar to today (around 5% to 6% of the defence budget).
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his most recent estimate is for the cost of design and build for a replacement continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent system.
[133834]
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his most recent estimate is for the cost of design and build for a replacement continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent system.
[133834]
[holding answer 18 December 2012]: Current forecast costs, including planned Submarine Enterprise Performance Programme efficiency measures, indicate that we remain within the 2006 White Paper estimates of £11 billion to £14 billion (at 2006-07 prices) for the Successor platform costs (assuming a four boat fleet).
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he expects to publish the final report of the Trident Alternatives Review.
[133218]
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he expects to publish the final report of the Trident Alternatives Review.
[133218]
I have been asked to reply as the Minister responsible for the Trident Alternatives Review.
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 31 October 2012, Official Report, column 249W, to the hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn).
How is the review into the alternatives to Trident going?
How is the review into the alternatives to Trident going?
The review is making good progress and is on target to report to the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister at the end of the year, as was announced by the previous Defence Secretary.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many staff are employed on the Trident Value for Money review;
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many staff are employed on the Trident Value for Money review;
(2) how much has been spent to date on carrying out the value for money review of Trident; and what estimate he has made of the final cost.
(2) how much has been spent to date on carrying out the value for money review of Trident; and what estimate he has made of the final cost.