Downing Street Says » British Nuclear Deterrent

Asked whether the Prime Minister agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the need to retain our independent nuclear deterrent for the long term, the PMOS said that if people looked back at the government’s manifesto they would see that it said we were committed to retain the independent nuclear deterrent. The Prime Minister had also spoken about this issue with Jeremy Paxman during the General Election campaign. In that interview he had said that we had to retain our nuclear deterrent and that we had had an independent nuclear deterrent for a long time. He went on to say that in principle he believed that it was important to retain our own independent deterrent, that he believed it was the right thing for the country and an important part of our defence.

Asked whether the Prime Minister thought we should replace Trident, the PMOS said that decisions would be taken in due course. There would also be a proper debate and announcement at the appropriate time. What the Prime Minister had said, what the Chancellor had said and what the manifesto said were of a piece. Asked if Britain could maintain a long term nuclear deterrent without Trident, the PMOS said that the government would address the issue and as the Prime Minister had already said it would address it in this parliament. It was undoubtedly a difficult issue. It would undoubtedly lead to proper debate and discussion, but, as in other areas, the government and the Prime Minister believed we had to face up to these difficult decisions in the interests of the security of the country and to maintain the country’s position in world affairs.

Asked what the point of a debate was if the government’s mind was already made up, the PMOS said that we would announce the decision in a white paper at the appropriate time and there would be a proper debate and discussion of that. Asked whether there would be a vote, the PMOS said there would be a proper discussion and debate on the government’s decision and the reasons set out for that decision. Asked if that meant the form of the debate had not yet been decided, the PMOS said that he was simply reflecting what the Prime Minister had said yesterday in the House of Commons.

Asked whether the government accepted that replacing Trident would cause tensions over the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the PMOS said that the time to have that kind of detailed debate would be when the decision had been announced. Asked whether Downing Street had been surprised by the Chancellor’s remarks, the PMOS said that given the government’s position as stated in the manifesto and given what the Prime Minister had said to Jeremy Paxman during the election, the Chancellor’s remarks were of a piece. Put that the key phrase used by the Chancellor had been " for the long term" and that this had been different therefore the question was whether the Prime Minister agreed with that, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister in his answer to Jeremy Paxman had said that we had to retain our nuclear deterrent, that we had had an independent nuclear deterrent for a long time, and that in principle he believed that it was important to retain our own independent deterrent. Therefore both comments were of a piece.

Put that the Chancellor had indicated today that he was comfortable about the idea of a vote, as the government would win, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had set out the position yesterday that there would be a proper discussion. Asked why now was not the proper time for a debate, the PMOS said that it was because governments had to look at and assess the different options, then set out those options properly so that people understood why decisions were made. Asked whether that process had begun yet, the PMOS said, as they all knew, that he did not get into processology. But people could be assured that for a decision of this magnitude the proper procedures and processes would be gone into and all the options would be assessed.

Asked about the timetable, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister had said that a decision had to be made in this parliament. If you put that timeframe around the question then that had its own implications for the timing of the process but we would not be providing a running commentary on that process. Asked whether the Prime Minster had an open mind on this question, the PMOS suggested that they had had plenty of time to assess the Prime Minister’s comments from the Jeremy Paxman interview where he had said that in principle it was important to retain an independent deterrent but that the decision had not yet been taken.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Thursday, June 22, 2006

British Nuclear Deterrent

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries