ONE of the more controversial topics in the run up to this year’s general election is the UK’s nuclear defence system.
The Trident system, which has been Britain’s only nuclear deterrent since the mid 90s, entered operational service in 1994 replacing the earlier Polaris system. The system consists of four Vanguard submarines, which at present are based at Faslane, in Scotland.
Proposals to renew Britain’s nuclear deterrent were voted for under the last Labour government, and passed, despite 95 Labour MPs voting against the proposition. Initial research and development continued under the Conservative-led coalition, despite opposition from the Liberal Democrats, and a vote over whether the four new submarines should be manufactured is scheduled for 2016.
However Calum Higgins, the Labour candidate for Carmarthen East and Dynefor, has told the Herald that he would vote against renewing Trident. He said: “This is one of the most important votes any politician can take part in and MPs should be able to vote with their conscience with a free vote for all MPs.”
The issue of whether the UK should retain a strategic nuclear capacity has divided politicians and the general public. Those in favour of renewing Trident point to the necessity of keeping a strategic nuclear deterrent, in light of North Korea and Iran developing nuclear capacity, and Russia maintaining a large number of ballistic nuclear weapons. Without Trident, they claim, Britain and their allies would be at risk from attack.
Those against the proposal believe that the proliferation of nuclear weaponry is in itself a barrier to unilateral disarmament, and believe that the costs of the new system, which the MoD estimate as up to £20 billion plus maintenance costs and CND believe would come close to closer to £100 billion, could be better spent on healthcare and education. Political parties opposed to the successor system include Plaid Cymru, the Green Party, and the SNP.
MrHiggins has declared that he will vote according to his conscience, rather than follow party guidelines: “If elected, I will vote against a replacement to Trident as I truly believe this money would be better spent on ensuring that we meet our obligation to fund the Armed Forces with better equipment, and on protecting public services in general from harsh cuts. Our Defence focus should now be on homegrown terrorism and the IS in Syria. Building a brand new Trident System will do nothing to protect us from the new threats we face,” he stated.
“The £100 billion estimated cost of Trident could also be used to provide fair funding for Wales, help avoid cuts to local Council budgets, decrease the financial deficit, and be spent on the NHS. I would pledge this money to public services and investment in our economy.”
Mr Higgins explained to the Herald why he had chosen to make this controversial announcement now, rather than after the May election: “On such a controversial topic I want the mandate of people and not just follow party policy,” he said. “I want to make this clear to the electorate before they go to the ballot box so if they elect me I will have their clear mandate to vote against Trident renewal. This is the right thing to do in my mind.”
Add Comment