Huhne nukes Trident fudge October 28, 2007
Posted by richardhuzzey in Uncategorized.trackback
Chris Huhne has this weekend admitted a key difference between himself and Nick Clegg over defence policy. While both resist Labour’s enthusiasm for the ‘Son of Star Wars’ project, Chris has said he regrets the party’s stance on the replacement of Trident nuclear weapons. Nick supports the current policy of waiting to make a decision, rather than declaring one way or the other now.
In an interview with the Observer, Chris outlines why he thinks new Trident would be a bad buy and that the Liberal Democrats cannot afford to sit on the fence.
Did he take this view in the last leadership competition? What did he say and do when this issue was debated at conference?
Yes – see Richards latest post http://libdems4chris.org.uk/2007/10/28/trident-the-only-2006-huhne-policy-left-undone/
Thanks
If we’re talking about “Trident Fudge” then what is this:
“Also, for the record, Chris is not a doctrinaire unilateralist; he thinks Trident is a poor purchase for Britain on cost and benefit and that it will squeeze the resources available to conventional forces. A smaller independent deterrent could be in the frame.”
Current party policy if I understand it correctly is to reduce to 100 warheads with 24 on each of the existing 4 boats. In the longer term reduce to 3 boats if that can still guarantee operational cover
So what sort of level is Chris proposing reducing to and how many boats is he considering to have? What is the military rationale behind setting our deterrence at the level advocated.
The Trident policy we have now is “think of a number and halve it” policy making. There was no indication that 24/100 warheads was in any way a more appropriate number than 48/200 or that there was a better military justification or what level of missiles were needed to undertake a counterstrike.
I just think Chris is indulging in the same approach to policy making – need to see some details if I’m going to be persuaded.
Not to say I wasn’t impressed with the rapid response
[...] Borrowman; James Graham; Matt Davies; LibDems4Chris: here, here, and here; Andy Mayer; Linda Jack: here, here, and here; Antony Hook; Edis Bevan; Iain Rubie [...]
[...] that he thought Britain should not renew Trident when it comes to the end of its life (”Huhne Nukes Trident Fudge“). That seemed clear. Two of his main reasons seemed to be (a) the cost of replacement, and [...]