SNP call to axe ‘morally questionable’ Trident defeated in Commons vote

AN SNP call to scrap the Trident nuclear deterrent has been seen off in the Commons by a huge margin, with some Labour MPs expected to have defied Jeremy Corbyn to vote with the Tories.

The opposition day motion was defeated by 330 to 64, majority 266, following several hours of Commons debate.

Labour MPs had been told to stay away or campaign in the Oldham by-election as shadow chancellor John McDonnell branded the debate a “stunt”.

But several pro-nuclear deterrent MPs made pointed speeches in the debate, while shadow defence minister Toby Perkins outlined how support for Trident was current official party policy.

Mr Corbyn, an avowed opponent of nuclear weapons, sparked controversy last week by appointing former London mayor Ken Livingstone as co-convener of Labour’s defence review.

The SNP pressed its call for Trident nuclear weapons to be scrapped as Labour MPs prepared to defy Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn over the deterrent in the earlier debate. Defence spokesman Brendan O’Hara moved the SNP opposition day motion surrounded by scores of party colleagues but facing few Labour and Tory MPs around the Commons.

Most of those Labour MPs present – in Parliament despite orders from their leadership to stay away amid claims the debate was a “stunt” – were prominent supporters of Trident.

Mr O’Hara said he was disappointed Mr Corbyn’s MPs had not fallen in line with the Labour leader’s firm opposition to Trident.

Official Labour policy backs Trident and the planned replacement of the Vanguard-class submarines carrying the missiles. Scottish Labour voted at its recent conference to abandon the weapons.

Mr O’Hara told MPs: “I have always argued there is no moral, economic or military case for Trident. Let’s be absolutely clear there is absolutely no moral case for any state possessing weapons of mass destruction – possessing the wherewithal to destroy the world several times over and everything in it is not something to be proud of, indeed, it is something I believe to be deeply ashamed of.

“Not only is Trident morally questionable, I think it is economic madness. Back in 2006 when the successor programme was first discussed, the likely cost of building new subs was put at between £15 and £20 billion. Yesterday’s SDSR put it at £31 billion, with on top of that a £10 billion contingency.”

He added: “Trident is not a military weapon. Trident is a political weapon – and it is a political weapon which can never and will never be used except to consume anything between 30% and 50% of the UK defence procurement budget.”

Mr O’Hara said it was a “military and political ego trip” adding the money could be better spent peacekeeping, reacting to emergencies such as the Ebola crisis, or helping refugees in the Middle East.

He continued: “In many ways, to put it in a more colloquial way, we are acting as having a fur coat and nae knickers… it is being paid for on the backs of the poor.”

Mr O’Hara accused Labour of hiding behind “the fig leaf of multilateralism” and said he had no doubt that Mr Corbyn would join the SNP in voting against Trident renewal next year.

He said: “A forlorn hope indeed, but there was a genuine hope, that perhaps with the election of Mr Corbyn that there would be at least a debate on Trident in this place.

“I fear that the leader has not managed to take his party with him and the paltry attendance today from the Labour Party would suggest exactly that.”

Internal Labour tensions over the issue exploded into public view last week when it was announced Mr Corbyn had appointed former London mayor Ken Livingstone as a “co-convener” of a party defence review alongside shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle, who supports Trident.Politics Podcast: SNP on Syria, Paris reaction and Labour’s position on Trident – click here to listenShadow chancellor John McDonnell blasted the Commons debate as an “SNP stunt” following a meeting of Labour MPs in Parliament last night

Former cabinet minister Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) said on Twitter he would defy the order to abstain, while other MPs, including John Woodcock (Barrow and Furness) and Jamie Reed (Copeland) were in the Commons and expected to vote against the SNP motion in defiance of Mr Corbyn.

Prime Minister David Cameron announced yesterday the cost of replacing the ageing Vanguard-class subs could rise to £41 billion.

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said Labour’s “shambles” over Trident wouldprovide comfort to Britain’s enemies as he appealed to Opposition MPs to renewthe political consensus on renewing the nuclear deterrent.

Mr Fallon described the appointment of anti-Trident Ken Livingstone to co-chair Labour’s review of defence policy as “like appointing an arsonist as the co-chief fire officer” and said he understood shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle’s anger over the move by Mr Corbyn.

He said: “It is worrying that in a more dangerous world that the cross party consensus we used to enjoy on our deterrent does now seem to be weakening.

“I should remind members opposite, it was Labour ministers (Clement) Attlee and (Ernest) Bevin who in the 1940s argued for a nuclear deterrent with a Union Jack on the top of it.

“Yet today we find a leader of the Labour Party opposing his party’s official policy.

“He wants to scrap Trident and he said that he’s no longer prepared to use it.”

Mr Fallon went on: “Our international allies will look on with dismay at this shambles opposite which can only, I have to say this, be of comfort to adversaries.

“So let me appeal again today to that tradition in the Labour Party that has proudly supported our independent nuclear deterrent to renew the consensus that existed between us, to put aside, as the shadow chancellor said on television on Sunday, to put aside party politics in the national interest and to join us in remaking the case for the deterrent.”

Mr Fallon said Trident’s continuous at-sea deterrent was the only way to deteraggression or blackmail from other nuclear armed states and insisted itsabolition would see the loss of thousands of jobs.

He added: “Our nuclear deterrent works, it deters aggression every single day.

“There have been many conflicts in the last six decades, not one of them has involved a direct conflict between nuclear states.

“Not one country under the protection of an extended nuclear umbrella has been invaded.

“Our nuclear deterrent is operationally independent – Mr O’Hara is quite wrong about that – it is operationally independent, its command and control system, as well as its decision-making apparatus are ours and ours alone, and it offers of course a

second centre of decision-making within Nato that will complicate an adversary’s plans.”

The Defence Secretary said the four new submarines would cost £31 billion spread over 35 years, amounting to an “insurance policy” of 0.2% a year of total government spending for a capability that will remain in service until 2060.

But he promised that he and Chancellor George Osborne would remain “eagle-eyed” to stop costs spiralling and stressed that a new delivery body and a new team at the Ministry of Defence headed by a commercial specialist had been set up to this end.

Summing up, he added: “This is not a time to gamble with our security, it’s a time on the contrary to safeguard this generation and generations to come.

“If you can be sure on either side of this House that there will be no nuclear threat that will emerge to this country throughout the 2030s, the 2040s and the 2050s, if you can be absolutely sure of that, then vote for the motion today.”

Some Labour MPs intervened on Mr Fallon to express their support for Trident renewal.

Mr Corbyn’s former leadership rival Liz Kendall insisted it is “foolhardy” to oppose Trident on the grounds that Britain does not face a threat from nuclear-armed states at present.

The Leicester West MP said: “Do you agree with me that it is not a choice if we want to keep Britain safe between renewing our nuclear deterrent and taking the necessary action against Isil?

“Both are vital and it would be foolhardy, not to say arrogant, to believe that anyone in this House can predict the risks and threats Britain will face in the next 30 or 40 years.”

Meanwhile, Mr Woodcock assured the Government that Labour MPs would back Trident renewal.

He said: “I can give you the pledge that Labour MPs will help you get through the programme that we started in government.

“Will you make a pledge in the House today that you will base the Main Gate decision on the operational contracting need of this programme and not on political considerations?”

Mr Fallon replied: “I’m very happy to give you that particular assurance.”Scrapping Trident would cost jobs and ‘leave Faslane area a wasteland’ says Chris Grayling – click here to read moreMeanwhile, the SNP’s Carol Monaghan, whose husband is a Trident submariner, said not all the crews on the nuclear submarines support renewal.

The Glasgow North West MP said: “I stand here as a wife of a submariner serving on HMS Victorious.

“However the crews there are doing a job, they are doing a service, they are serving as they are sent to do, and they are there defending our democracy.

“So I think you have to realise that whilst the crew are there doing their job, not all of them will agree with your views on Trident.”

Shadow defence minister Toby Perkins attacked the SNP and questioned why the debate had been brought forward.

“This issue is too important for the future of our country for Members in this House to play party political games with it,” he said.

“We all know that the reason the SNP have scheduled this half-day debate, not to influence Government policy – in fact there wasn’t one single question to the Government in the contribution they made – but in order to attempt to score cheap political points.”

Mr Perkins repeatedly clashed with the SNP as he told the House that “it is not appropriate to vote” on the motion “at a time when we are still conducting our review”.

The Labour Party is reviewing all aspects of its defence policy, including the UK’s nuclear deterrent.

Amid demands for clarification, Mr Perkins sought to spell out Labour’s position on Trident.

He said: “Labour’s position, as agreed by the National Policy Forum in 2014 and approved by Labour Party conference in Brighton this year, is that we are committed to a minimum, credible, independent nuclear deterrent delivered through a continuous at-sea deterrent.

“That is the policy that was in the manifesto, that all Labour Party members fought the 2015 general election on and we are proud of the previous Labour government’s approach and success in disarmament.”

Mr Perkins reiterated that the review is being led by shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle as MPs asked about the involvement of Ken Livingstone.

He also told the House that Mr Corbyn’s views on the subject are “well known”.

“All of us who support maintaining a nuclear presence should not be afraid to allow open and honest debate of this important issue,” he said.

“It would clearly be ludicrous for me to pretend there aren’t differences of opinion within the Parliamentary Labour Party and the wider party on whether this is the right policy.

“In the end national party conference and the National Policy Forum decide what the Labour Party’s approach to this question will be in the future.”

Mr Perkins called on the Government to provide more details about the costs associated with replacing Trident.