Labour CND recently launched into a new venture for us: podcasting. Our first was released the day after the Chancellor’s spring statement: a conversation with Ron Smith that produced some interesting responses.
We asked Ron if a bigger MoD budget would benefit the British economy, and if more military spending meant more jobs. His responses were revealing. But when we asked about Trident, the answer was franker than any you might expect from an economist:
‘Trident, I feel, is a complete waste of money – and when I say that to military audiences two thirds of them applaud’
Ron is Emeritus Professor of Applied Economics at Birkbeck, University of London, where he’s researched on the economics of arms trading and defence policy for many years and published a long list of articles and books. He’s advised the Treasury and been a consultant to the National Audit Office, so we reckon he knows a thing or two.
Our conversation with Ron is well worth a half-hour listen. If you do, and if you like what Labour CND’s doing – please give us a like, give us a follow, and come back for more.
Above: surrender after the fall of Singapore, 1942
Labour CND Vice Chair, Christine Shawcroft reminds us not all examples of increasing military spending are positive.
When I was on holiday last year, there was a book on great military blunders lying around the rental. It was a very weighty tome, as you can imagine, but I flicked through it and then found myself reading the chapter on the fall of Singapore, then part of the British Empire, in the Second World War.
Singapore was considered safe on the landward side, because of the impenetrable jungle behind it. All the British defence experts and the powers-that-be were sure that the danger came from the sea. So certain were they that they knew what was needed to defend the city, the authorities spent a fortune on huge gun emplacements all around the coast, pointing out to sea. It was an enormous expense, but there are no limits when it comes to safety and security.
Singapore’s white elephant
In February 1942, 35,000 Japanese troops slashed their way through the dense jungle and, using the element of surprise, defeated the 85,000 strong garrison. The massive guns couldn’t be used: they were in the wrong place and pointing the wrong way. On 15th February, Lt General Arthur Percival signed the surrender.
Churchill said it was the ‘worst disaster and largest capitulation in British history.’ Yet it wasn’t for lack of defence spending.
Fast forward to 2025. Donald Trump doesn’t want to pay so much towards the defence of Europe, but he has no doubt that it needs defending. And apparently it needs defending from the Russians, who are said to be poised to invade their former vassal states in eastern Europe and once there will be well placed to move on the west.
Happily picking up the poisoned chalice, Keir Starmer is prepared to cut overseas development and slash public services to the bone, all to hugely increase military spending. He is pledged to increase the number of ‘our’ nuclear weapons – because being able to nuke every country in the world, some of them more than once, just isn’t enough to keep us safe these days.
As the saying goes, when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Countering the wrong threat?
Starmer is repeating the mistakes of the rulers of Singapore, spending huge amounts of our money to counter the wrong threat. The Russian bear is NOT about to try and gobble up Europe. Meanwhile the Far Right are capitalizing on working class discontent with the cost of living, huge NHS waiting lists and the lack of affordable housing. Sneaking up behind us is catastrophic climate breakdown which will flood every coastal city in the world.
The money being wasted on countering the wrong enemy could be spent on safeguarding democracy, investing in an economy geared to socially useful goods and services, providing insulation and renewable energy.
Carrying on the way we are is leading to disaster. Like in Singapore, the guns are useless.
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.
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.’
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Most people know that Trident, Britain’s submarine fleet is based at Faslane in Scotland. But do you know where other nuclear weapons and nuclear power facilities or US bases are? CND has produced an interactive map of nuclear Britain.
