Military

This section contains information about military aspects of Trident replacement and the current UK nuclear weapons programme such as deployment, NATO, first use and warhead convoys. It also has material relating to debate about the defence budget.

Defence budget 'cannot withstand' Trident

Date: 
16 August, 2010
Source: 
http://www.defencemanagement.com

Defence Management Journal source
 
Former senior defence officials have urged the government to go ahead with the Trident replacement, but not at the expense of spending on other defence projects.

Sunday Telegraph - Letters: Trident shouldn’t lead to more defence cuts

Date: 
15 August, 2010
Source: 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk

Sunday Telegraph source
 
Leading defence experts call for Trident's replacement to be agreed without the diversion of any resources from the existing core defence budget. SIR – We call upon the Prime Minister to authorise the Trident replacement programme in its entirety, without diverting any resources from the existing core defence budget. Our conventional Armed Forces are chronically over-stretched and seriously under-resourced; they cannot withstand further reductions in their budget in order to fund the Trident replacement.

BBC - Former navy chief in government cuts warning

Date: 
6 July, 2010
Source: 
http://news.bbc.co.uk

BBC News source
 
by Dominic Blake
A decade of under-investment has left the Royal Navy with a serious shortage of ships, according to the former First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jock Slater.
 
The former head of the Royal Navy said in an interview with BBC Radio Solent that any further cuts would lead to an "enormous strain" on the service.

Commons Hansard - Luff: Column 624W

Date: 
1 July, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 1 July 2010 : Column 624W
 
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 16 June 2010, Official Report, column 470W, on radioactive materials, what security and safety standards apply to the storage and transport of each different class of special nuclear materials. [4751]

Commons Hansard - debates - Joyce: Column 104

Date: 
21 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 21 Jun 2010 : Column 104
 
Eric Joyce (Falkirk) (Lab):
 
[...]
 
 
I want to address two issues in the brief time available to me, starting with a quick word about Trident. My personal perspective is that Opposition Front Benchers are slightly constrained by the fact that we were in government until quite recently, so we cannot really put a proper Opposition perspective on things at the moment. That is simply the way it is. I am not being critical of Labour Front Benchers, who are all very good and who excelled as Defence Ministers. It is just the way things are: things change, we are now in opposition, and I think that our profile will change in some ways too.

Commons Hansard - debates - Fox: Column 55

Date: 
21 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 21 Jun 2010 : Column 55
 
Ms Gisela Stuart (Birmingham, Edgbaston) (Lab): I happen to agree with the Secretary of State's stance on nuclear weapons and Trident. Will he say a little more about the extent to which he regards Trident to be, as well as a deterrent, part of our obligations as a permanent member of the Security Council-as one of the P5, at the top table?

Commons Hansard - debates - Fox: Column 58

Date: 
21 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 21 Jun 2010 : Column 58
 
Mr Dai Havard (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) (Lab): I apologise for interrupting now, because what the Secretary of State has just said is hugely important, but may I go back to what he said about the review of the deterrent? May we be clear that the financial review of the nuclear deterrent is due to take place before the recess, that it is a one-off activity and that it will not be part of a continuing review at each of the various stages of the programme that has been outlined, including the main gate stage? Will the Secretary of State clarify that point?

Commons Hansard - debates - Woodcock: Column 84

Date: 
21 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 21 Jun 2010 : Column 84
 
John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) (Lab/Co-op):
 
[...]
  
No function of Government is more important than the defence of their people and support for those who put themselves in harm's way. It is therefore absolutely right that in this review, the needs of country and of the front line must come first. Our manufacturing base is critically important. I represent a constituency where 5,000 people are employed in Barrow shipyard alone-the foundation of the whole economy. There is a supply chain that reaches right across the UK, with the Trident successor set to provide work for nearly 400 suppliers stretching from Aberdeen to Portsmouth. Furness would be decimated if production were to cease. Yet I know that it is the contribution that employees in my constituency make to their country's security that gives them such pride. They include workers at BAE's Global Combat Systems making the M777 howitzers for troops in Afghanistan, the likes of Oxley and Marl responding to urgent operational requirements such as infrared lighting to support night driving in that difficult terrain, and workers at BAE's Submarine Solutions building the Astute class boats that will potentially, in future conflicts, lessen the need for front-line troops to put themselves in harm's way.

Commons Hansard - Luff: Column 470W

Date: 
16 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 16 Jun 2010 : Column 470W
 
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what definitions his Department uses for the four categories of special nuclear materials. [2038]

Commons Hansard - Howarth: Column 352W

Date: 
15 June, 2010
Source: 
http://www.publications.parliament.uk

Hansard source - 15 Jun 2010 : Column 352W
 
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the exchange programme between the Ministry of Defence Police and Guarding Agency Special Escort Group and the United States Office of Secure Transportation remains in force; how many (a) US and (b) UK staff have undertaken exchange visits under the terms of the programme; and whether the programme took place under the auspices of the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement. [2042]