Was Scotland right to vote no to Trident ?

I'm being thoroughly stereotypical in the way I act on Trident I am afraid. You see, I'm generally a fence sitter on this issue. I know that there are some within the Lib Dems who would like us to throw away our Nuclear weapons. I'm not one of them. Similarly, there are some who think we should immediately back a replacement for Trident. I'm not sure.

After disagreeing with Ming on housing, I have to say I completely back his judgment on all matters foreign and defense related. Ming has been proved rigth time and time again and for all his detractors in other parties, the one thing you never hear him criticised about by Tories is his judgement on issues. Ming feels that we have more time than Labour state before we need decide on a replacement for Trident. given that Labour are not renowned for their timing in defence matters (they might tell us we have 45 minutes to make a decision), I think we can be certain that Blair was trying to railroad parliament in to a macho decision as part of his legacy.

So, some of you ask, why is Trident an issue today. Well the Scottish Parliament today voted against Trident renewal. Okay, so we're all in agreement then ? Well no, we're not.

The problem is that it was a rather unholy alliance of Lib Dems (wait and see), SNP (we want to oppose Labour), Labour rebels (long time CND) and Greens (wave the white flag - we surrender) who voted against Trident.

There will come a time when a decision will have to be made. With a resurgent Russia threatening to aim nuclear weapons at us again and Iran arming itself, I think it is clear that a non Nuclear Britain is a non starter.

Of course, the SNP are playing political games. But they also know, like Belgium, that they don't need Nuclear weapons. After all, when you share a land border with another Nuclear power you can sit back and let them bare the costs. Looks like England will be subsidising the Scot's again !


Iain Rubie Dale said...

The only reason that we Lib Dems have a dammnable fudge policy on Trident is that the debate was held at Harrogate in the run up to a Scottish General elction and all out Council elections. This meant that many Fed Reps could not get down South to vote against this nonsense.

The Scottish party is 80/20 against any renewal of this waste of money.

If the English party is so in favour of it then you are welcome to it. I wonder if you would be so keen if it were based on the Wash?


Louise said...

Your assertion that the SNP opposes Trident merely as a way of opposing Labour is absolutely wrong. The SNP have been long term opponents of both nuclear weapons and nuclear power. Scotland doesn't need nuclear weapons but it does need decent health, education, housing and transport systems and the savings from Trident would save that.

You're right - Scotland does share a border with a nuclear power which is perhaps a method of protection but also puts it in the line of fire.

Norfolk Blogger said...

Since the wash is a shallow area, I doubt a nuclear sub could even submerge there. But I am not a nimby about these matters. Freefall nuclear weapons were stored in Norfolk for some years near RAF Marham and I have no problem with nuclear warheads being stored here.

As for Scotland becoming a target, remember, the Soviet Union targetted Belgium, Portugal and Norway with Nuclear weapons, none of which are nuclear powers.