Written by Kate Hudson
You might think that the new government is super-keen to retain and replace Trident. You might think the MoD considers it indispensable to our national security. And you might think that if it is that important they would be willing to pay for it. Well, think again. Over the last few days, we’ve seen a row unfolding between the Treasury and the MoD. Neither of them want to pay to replace Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system.
As far as I’m concerned – and the majority of the British population – I don’t blame them. They would be irresponsible in the extreme, not only to waste up to ? 100 billion on nuclear weapons over the years ahead, but to risk provoking proliferation by saying that nuclear weapons are vital to a country’s security.
But this new reluctance hardly fits with the rhetoric of the last two months, where the government has refused to include Trident in the Strategic Defence Review, claiming that it is so vital that its replacement cannot even be reconsidered.
Instead, the government is reviewing its ‘value-for-money’. Well if they continue along the lines of this current row, maybe they will decide it’s not worth it. Just a thought!
Why not express your views to the Treasury on this matter? In line with the new ‘big society’ ethos of popular responsibility and engagement, I can now facilitate your participation in the Treasury’s Spending Challenge process. Click here to make your suggestions about what the government should cut. We have a suggested text about scrapping Trident, but feel free to change it as you prefer. But it is essential that anti-Trident views are expressed because, after all, the only rational, legal, cost-effective, moral and safe option is to scrap it.
As far as I’m concerned – and the majority of the British population – I don’t blame them. They would be irresponsible in the extreme, not only to waste up to ? 100 billion on nuclear weapons over the years ahead, but to risk provoking proliferation by saying that nuclear weapons are vital to a country’s security.
But this new reluctance hardly fits with the rhetoric of the last two months, where the government has refused to include Trident in the Strategic Defence Review, claiming that it is so vital that its replacement cannot even be reconsidered.
Instead, the government is reviewing its ‘value-for-money’. Well if they continue along the lines of this current row, maybe they will decide it’s not worth it. Just a thought!
Why not express your views to the Treasury on this matter? In line with the new ‘big society’ ethos of popular responsibility and engagement, I can now facilitate your participation in the Treasury’s Spending Challenge process. Click here to make your suggestions about what the government should cut. We have a suggested text about scrapping Trident, but feel free to change it as you prefer. But it is essential that anti-Trident views are expressed because, after all, the only rational, legal, cost-effective, moral and safe option is to scrap it.