Posted on

Government watchdog says Trident submarine replacement is ‘unachievable’

The 2023-24 annual report of a government watchdog has awarded its lowest rating to one of the projects at the heart of the Trident submarine replacement programme. The current Vanguard class submarines are due to be replaced before they become unreliable and too expensive to last beyond 2030.

For the third year in succession, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) has awarded a red rating to the £4 billion Core Production Capability Programme (CPCP) which is designed to provide safe nuclear reactor cores for the Royal Navy’s new Dreadnought-class submarines which are due to take over patrolling the world’s oceans with Britain’s nuclear weapons on board from 2030.

The CPCP’s job is to deliver safe nuclear reactor cores for Vanguard submarines, providing the UK with a modern, safe, and independent manufacturing capability now and in the long term. The IPA defines its red rating as indicating ‘the project appears to be unachievable’. Major issues do not seem ‘manageable or resolvable’ and a project’s viability should be reassessed.

The London-based watchdog reports to the Cabinet Office and Treasury on all sorts of major projects – from railways, schools, and hospitals, to defence, and information technology. IPA experts are mandated to track and monitor major government projects, to ensure they’re deliverable on time and within budget. Some nuclear projects are, however, kept secret from the public on the grounds of military and commercial security.

The Nation newspaper reports that Rolls-Royce, which is manufacturing Dreadnought reactors for the Ministry of Defence, has acknowledged the project is ‘challenging’. Rolls-Royce is a major player in the defence aerospace engine sector. A spokesperson said the company was ‘confident’ it could deliver on time. The MoD claimed the programme was ‘on track’.

The IPA’s 2023-24 annual report, published in January, also highlighted ‘significant issues’ with eight other major UK nuclear projects, the combined cost of which is over £55 billion. The amber rating awarded them indicates ‘management attention’ is needed. These projects include building new facilities at Faslane naval base which is home to Trident’s submarine fleet, the dismantling of nuclear submarines at Rosyth dockyards, and the construction of all future nuclear-powered Astute, Dreadnought and Aukus submarines.

A new programme which repackages former projects for making and storing nuclear materials at Aldermaston in Berkshire has also been rated amber for the past two years.

Scottish CND chair, Lynn Jamieson continues to highlight Trident’s dependence on the US military infrastructure and technology. ‘The nuclear weapons based on the west coast of Scotland, are arguably more US technology than British. The submarines, whilst built in Barrow-in-Furness in England, are assembled according to US blueprints and with US components. The Trident missiles fired by the submarines are built, supplied and maintained in the US.’

Both the Scottish National Party and the Green Party of Scotland have criticised Trident replacement. Patrick Harvie, co-leader of the Scottish Greens and Glasgow MSP has called for the money Westminster is pouring into nuclear weapons to be used instead to reverse the government’s austerity measures.

Posted on

Starmer’s ‘triple lock’ on Trident

Within days of the general election being announced, Keir Starmer committed Labour to a ‘triple lock’ on Trident, an attempt to demonstrate nuclear weapons are safe in Labour’s hands. He also reaffirmed Labour’s commitment to match Sunak’s 2.5% increase in military spending which NATO is demanding.

Labour will build four new Dreadnought class submarines to deliver Britain’s nuclear warheads, he said, with at least one submarine at sea 24/7. Starmer also reaffirmed Labour’s decision to match the Tory government pledge to raise military spending  by 2.5% of gross domestic product as soon as possible.

This is a dangerous waste, which mirrors the approach of the Tory government. It signals more war, more military spending, and more nuclear weapons, as CND General Secretary Kate Hudson has pointed out. CND has estimated the cost of upgrading and maintaining Trident at £205 billion. The Conservative commitment to raise military spending to 2.5% by 2030, part of the Spring budget, will amount to an additional £87 billion a year.

CND Chair Tom Unterrainer commented that Starmer had  offered no justification of how nuclear weapons might protect Britain’s security. ‘For a man who claims to care about international law,’ said Unterrainer, ‘there is no mention of how expanding and modernising Britain’s nuclear arsenal goes against these norms. We need a bold vision for what real security means: one that puts climate, food security, and people at its heart, not more militarism and conflict.’

Read CND’s press release here

Posted on

Labour CND response to Daily Telegraph article

David Lammy and John Healey have used an article in the Daily Telegraph (Paywall) to argue that nuclear weapons are Labour’s “heritage” and describe the commitment to Trident and NATO as “unshakeable”. This is a clear attempt to rewrite history and gloss over the huge opposition to Trident amongst Labour Party members and in the trade unions, and the substantial periods where full and comprehensive nuclear disarmament has been adopted as the official policy. 

There has also been an emphatic tradition of advocating nuclear disarmament from all wings of the Labour Party.  In recent years large numbers of constituency Labour Parties have made submissions to party conferences and the National Policy Forum in favour of scrapping Trident, and the Labour Party Conference in 2021 passed a resolution opposing AUKUS. 

Often the disagreement within the party is said to be concerning the means to an end of a nuclear-free world – an aspiration regrettably missing from the Telegraph article.  The next Labour Government should commit to a meaningful programme of nuclear disarmament and to signing the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, known as the Nuclear Ban Treaty, which is supported by more than 120 countries as well as 68% of Labour Party members. 

We continue to believe that the billions of pounds being wasted on a new generation of nuclear weapons would be better spent addressing real security and priorities like climate justice, health, education and building a fairer and more equal society. Labour CND will continue to campaign against nuclear weapons and for peace
Posted on

Party members decisively reject Trident replacement

The results of a recent LabourList survey confirm that the overwhelming majority of party members want to scrap Trident. In a poll of 7,197 readers, 80.9% of whom were party members, only 12.3% supported Trident renewal.

Paticipants in LabourList’s survey were asked which of a list of policies in Labour’s 2019 general election manifesto the party should continue to support. The results are below. Only two policies failed to achieve majority backing. With 49.6% fast and free broadband fell just short of a majority, but renewing Trident was decisively rejected .

Policies with majority support were:
* Cut the substantial majority of carbon emissions by 2030 (82%)
* Create one million green jobs (74%)
* Close tax loopholes enjoyed by private schools (73%)
* Increase income tax for those earning over £80,000 (71%)
* Nationalise mail, rail, energy and water (67%)
* Repeal anti-trade union legislation (64%)
* Scrap tuition fees (61%)
* Extend full voting rights to all UK residents (61%)
* Set up a publicly owned generic drug company (60.5%)
* Compensate the WASPI women (57%)
* Maximum pay ratios of 20:1 in the public sector (56%)
* Aim for 32-hour working week within a decade (51%)

The LabourList result confirms a YouGov poll for The Times on the eve of Labour’s 2019 annual conference, which showed 70% of the 1,185 Labour Party members sampled wanted to scrap Britain’s nuclear weapons system.

Read LabourList‘s survey results here

Posted on

Trident vs NHS

The Tory government’s risk assessment warned that health pandemics were a major threat to Britain’s security, nuclear attack wasn’t. So why are we spending £205 billion on Trident when the NHS is chronically underfunded askes Labour CND Secretary, Ruth Brown in a recent letter to the Financial Times.

Posted on

Labour CND conference

 

Topics include

  • International trends and US strategy
  • TUC policy
  • Labour’s Defence Diversification Agency
  • Middle East update
  • US-EU divided on Iran
  • Nuclear winter
  • Human security

Speakers include

  • Julie Ward MEP
  • Ted Seay, arms control specialist
  • Kate Hudson, CND General Secretary
  • Sami Ramadani, Iraqi Democrats
  • Barbara White, Musicians Union

Admission Free * All welcome

Followed by Labour CND AGM

Labour CND is a specialist section of CND. If you’re a member of CND and of the Labour Party, you’re eligible and welcome to participate in our annual meeting. 

Need more info? Contact labourcnd@gmail.com

Posted on

Labour’s Policy Forum: Speak up on Trident

Checked out the Labour Party website lately? If so, you’ll have noticed that one of the changes takes you to a Policy Forum page where you can have your say about any of Labour’s policy commissions. You can make a submission on a topic of your choice, click on the ‘get involved’ tab at the top of the page  or comment and vote on other people’s submissions.

Continue reading “Labour’s Policy Forum: Speak up on Trident”

Posted on

Take a Contemporary Motion to your CLP

Labour CND has prepared two Contemporary Motions, which we hope Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs) will submit for debate at the Labour Party conference. Please do take these motions to your CLP meetings – if the motions are chosen by delegates as one of the four for debate at the conference and passed, they should become Party policy! Please note there is a 250 word limit on  motions submitted for conference.

The deadline for submission of Contemporary Motions is 14 September. It is therefore essential that your CLP meets to discuss this issue before that date. We need as many submissions as possible to ensure that we cannot be ignored by the Conference Arrangements Committee (CAC).