|
|
|
 |
|
|
| HOME |
| NUCLEAR AND WMD |
| * |
| * US Policy |
| * CTBT |
| * NPT |
| * NATO Policy |
| MISSILE DEFENCE |
| BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS |
| NUCLEAR AND WMD PUBLICATIONS |
| NUCLEAR AND WMD LINKS |
|
ISSUE AREAS: |
| EUROPEAN SECURITY |
| WEAPONS TRADE |
BEYOND TRIDENTArchive of Parliamentary Developments 2007For the latest coverage go to: http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/beyondtrident. For coverage from 2006 go to: http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/parl06.htm. Defence Committee'The Defence Industrial Strategy', HoC Defence Committee
Sixth Report of Session 2006-07, update, HC 177, 15 February 2007.
'The Future of the UK's Strategic Nuclear
Deterrent', uncorrected transcript of oral evidence to the
HoC Defence Committee by the Rt Hon Des Browne MP, Mr Desmond Bowen,
Mr Tom McKane, Rear Admiral Andrew Mathews RN, Ms Mariot Leslie
and Mr Nick Bennett, 6 February 2007 'The Future of the UK's Strategic Nuclear Deterrent',
uncorrected transcript of oral evidence to the HoC Defence Committee
by Professor Christopher Greenwood QC, Professor Nick Grief, Professor
Steven Haines and Professor Philippe Sands, 30 January 2007 Parliamentary Questions and AnswersNuclear Weapons Hansard - 28 February 2007 Mr. Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what
advice he has received on the public consultation on the White Paper
The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent. Trident Hansard - 28 February 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence from
which budget heading the spending on a Trident replacement will
come; and if he will make a statement. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 26 February 2007 Mr. Chaytor: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when
he expects to reduce the upper limit on the number of operationally
available nuclear warheads to fewer than 160. Nuclear Submarines Hansard - 20 February 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what
feasibility studies have been undertaken by his Department on acquiring
a replacement for the Vanguard Class ship submersible ballistic
nuclear submarines without using the construction facility at Barrow
in Furness; and if he will make a statement. Trident Hansard - 20 February 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what
estimate he has made of the number of skilled jobs which will be
involved in the (a) design, (b) construction and (c) maintenance
work required for Trident replacement. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 8 February 2007 Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
how much his Department has spent on the public consultation on
the replacement for the Trident system. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 6 February 2007 Mr. Alan Reid: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
what factors were taken into account in reaching the conclusion
in the White Paper on the future of the UK's nuclear deterrent that
the upper limit on the number of operationally available warheads
should be 160; and what (a) methodology and (b) calculations were
used in reaching that conclusion. Aldermaston Hansard - 5 February 2007 Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what
the projected cost is of the AWE development plan at Aldermaston;
what the expected duration of the project is; how expenditure has
been committed to the project to date; and if he will make a statement.
5 Feb 2007 : Column 686W to and including 2007-08. Details of investment at AWE for the
period beyond 2007-08 will be determined over the next year, following
this year's comprehensive spending review. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 5 February 2007 Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign
and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the implications
of the UK's plans for the replacement of Trident for the negotiations
under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on nuclear disarmament.
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Hansard - 2 February 2007 Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
what progress has been made on negotiations towards agreement pursuant
to article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, on nuclear
disarmament measures; and what assessment he has made of the key
obstacles to such negotiations. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 1 February 2007 Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what
assessment he has made of the potential impact of the use of nuclear
weapons on climate change. Trident Hansard - 1 February 2007 Colin Challen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
how many contributions have been received from (a) members of the
public and (b) organisations on the consultation on a replacement
for Trident. In Parliament, January 2007Defence CommitteeUncorrected transcript of oral evidence by Professor
Richard L Garwin, Mr Paul Ingram, Dr Stephen Pullinger, Dr Jeremy
Stocker and Dr Lee Willet, based on memoranda submitted by the US
National Academy of Sciences, British American Security Information
Council, International Security Information Service, International
Institute for Strategic Studies and Royal United Services Institute,
taken before the Defence Committee on The Future of the UK's Defence
Strategic Nuclear Deterrent: The White Paper, Tuesday 23 January
2007 Uncorrected transcript of oral evidence by Ms Sian
Jones, Mr Bruce Kent, Ms Di McDonald and Mr John Ainslie, based
on memoranda submitted by Aldermaston Women's Peace Campaign, Campaign
for Nuclear Disarmament and Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament,
taken before the Defence Committee on The Future of the UK's Defence
Strategic Nuclear Deterrent: The White Paper, Tuesday 16 January
2007 Submitted memoranda can be downloaded here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/ Parliamentary Questions and AnswersTrident Hansard - 25 January 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether
the conclusions of the naval base review will be available to the
House prior to the debate on Trident replacement; and if he will
make a statement. Nuclear Submarines Hansard - 23 January 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether
the submarine supply chain could be maintained for the construction
of future ship submersible nuclear submarines in the absence of
a positive decision on a Vanguard successor; and if he will make
a statement. UK Nuclear Weapons Capability Hansard - 23 January 2007 Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
if he will undertake road shows to enable consultation with the
public on the Government's views on nuclear weapons with the public. Trident Hansard - 22 January 2007 Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
in which year he expects that the Trident nuclear capability would,
if not upgraded, become obsolete. Submarines Hansard 19 January 2007 Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
what assessment he has made of the potential vulnerability of submarines
at sea to detection by future space-based technology. Nuclear Submarines Hansard - 16 January 2007 Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment he has made of the factors enabling United States Ohio-class Trident submarines to have longer in-service lives than United Kingdom Vanguard submarines; and what lessons can be drawn from them for the benefit of the future nuclear deterrent; (2) what assessment he has made of (a) whether Vanguard submarines have typically operated (i) at a higher level of intensity and (ii) for longer periods at sea than United States Ohio-class Trident submarines and (b) the effect of those factors upon the differential in-service lives of those submarines. [105756] Des Browne [holding answer 11 December 2006]: I refer the hon. Member to paragraphs 1-4, 5-6 and 6-5 of the White Paper, 'The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent' (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006. When detailed concept work begins on a new class of SSBNs, we will take into account relevant lessons from the submarine-building experience of other countries, including the United States, as we would normally do on a programme of this kind. Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what he expects the projected in-service dates to be for each of the proposed new Trident submarines. [107860] Des Browne [holding answer 11 December 2006]: As the Government stated in the White Paper, 'The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent' (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006, we expect that continuous deterrent patrols could no longer be assured from around 2024 if the first of the new submarines were not in place by then. The White Paper made clear that we are not yet in a position to
make a firm judgement about how many submarines we require in future.
It is too early to determine subsequent in-service dates. Nuclear Submarines Hansard - 15 January 2007 Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans his Department has for ensuring an adequate supply of highly enriched uranium to fuel four replacement ballistic missile submarines; and what the projected cost is of these plans. Des Browne: We are considering options to ensure the supply
of highly enriched uranium to fuel replacement ballistic missile
submarines. The broad-order cost of such a requirement is reflected
in the overall estimate of £15-20 billion indicated in the White
Paper (CM 6994) published on 4 December. At this very early stage
in the procurement process, we are not in a position to break down
these estimates in the way requested. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607 Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 15 January 2007 Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what (a) foreign policy and (b) diplomatic considerations support the Government's decision to commence the replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system in 2006; and if she will make a statement. Dr. Howells: The foreign policy and diplomatic considerations relevant to the decision to maintain our deterrent are detailed in the December 2006 White Paper "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Weapons". A copy of this document has been placed in the Library of the House. Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what advice she has received from her officials supporting the view that it is necessary to make a decision on Trident replacement in 2006; and if she will make a statement. Dr. Howells: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and
the Ministry of Defence jointly produced the White Paper on the
Future of the UK's Nuclear Deterrent. FCO officials were closely
involved in all the preparatory analysis, including the realistic
life of the Vanguard class ballistic missile submarines and the
time required to develop replacements. The outcome of these discussions
was that if we were to maintain unbroken deterrent capability, decisions
needed to be taken now on whether to replace those submarines. Nuclear Deterrent Hansard - 10 January 2007 Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how each of the options outlined in the White Paper The Future of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent was tested for viability. Des Browne: The process by which the options were assessed is described in detail in section 5 and annex B of the White Paper "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006. Copies of the White Paper are available in the Library of the House. Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what factors determined (a) the expected operating cost of the Trident replacement cited in the White Paper The future of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent and (b) the costs of Trident cited in 1994; and if he will make a statement. Des Browne: A number of factors determined the estimate (set out in paragraph 5-14 of the White Paper: "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994), published on 4 December) of the expected in-service costs of the UK nuclear deterrent once a new fleet of SSBNs comes into service. The estimate drew on: projections based on the actual and planned future maintenance and operating costs of the current system, including manpower costs; assessments of in-service costs of system components; studies of potential infrastructure and disposal costs; projected costs of the Atomic Weapons Establishment; and an assessment of the impact of risk. The estimate of the lifetime operating costs of Trident provided
by the MOD to the House of Commons Defence Committee in 1993, shortly
before the first of the Vanguard class submarines, HMS Vanguard,
entered operational service, included projections for: manpower
and related costs of the crews of the submarines and associated
civilian staff; the costs of refits of the submarines over the lifetime
of the force; the costs of stores and stores personnel and transport;
a share of the running costs of the Clyde submarine base; the costs
of the Atomic Weapons Establishment; in-service support of the strategic
weapons system and the submarine; and decommissioning and disposal
of the submarines. Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 9 January 2007 Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether there will be an increase in his Department's budget to finance the new nuclear deterrent proposed in the White Paper "The future of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent"; and if he will make a statement. Des Browne: I have nothing further to add to paragraph 5-15 of the White Paper "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006. Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to paragraph B-14 of The future of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent, (1) what level of investment in research and development there will be on effective counter-measures to monitor submarine movements; (2) whether the cost of investment in research and development on effective counter-measures to monitor submarine movements is included in the estimated operating cost of 5 to 6 per cent. of his Department's budget. Des Browne: Our overall strategy for investment in research and development is set out in the Defence Technology Strategy, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House. The technologies relevant to ensuring effective counter-measures to attempted monitoring of submarine movement have been identified as priorities in both the Cross-Cutting Technologies section (B2) and the Maritime section (Bl1). The MOD invests in these technologies for anti-submarine warfare and, under current plans, will continue an appropriate level of investment. No specific allowance has been made for the costs of such continuing investment in the estimate of the expected in-service costs of the UK's nuclear deterrent once a new fleet of SSBNs comes into service, set out at paragraph 5-14 of the White Paper: "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994), although the estimate makes allowance for the cost of mid-life update of the submarines and also for financial risks and uncertainties. Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what estimate he has made of the costs of (a) D5 nuclear missiles and (b) other ballistic missiles; [109957] (2) what assessments were made of alternative (a) ballistic and (b) cruise missiles other than those referred to in the White Paper "The future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent". Des Browne: I have nothing further to add to paragraphs 5-10 and B-4 and Box 5-1 of the White Paper "The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent" (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006. Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the US Administration on providing submarines for the Trident project. Des Browne: As stated at paragraph 6-3 of the White Paper 'The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent' (Cm 6994), published on 4 December 2006, "It would be our intention to build the new SSBNs [ballistic missile submarines] in the UK, for reasons of national sovereignty, nuclear regulation, operational effectiveness and safety, and maintenance of key skills." The outcome of discussions with the US on future co-operation in
this area is set out in the exchange of letters between the Prime
Minister and President of the United States, published on 19 December
2006. Copies of the letters are available in the Library of the
House. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/ Nuclear Weapons Hansard - 8 January 2007 Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the availability of the skills necessary in the UK to enable the construction of submarines for the Trident project. [113256] Des Browne: Such an assessment was set out in Section B
of the White Paper, "Defence Industrial Strategy" (Cm 6697) published
in December 2005, copies of which are available in the Library of
the House. The Ministry of Defence also participated fully in the
House of Commons Defence Committee's recent investigation into the
Manufacturing and Skills Base. Their report, "The Future of the
UK's Strategic Nuclear Deterrent: the Manufacturing and Skills Base"
(HC 59) was published on 19 December. For the latest coverage go to: http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/beyondtrident. For coverage from 2006 go to: http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/parl06.htm. Back to Nuclear and WMD |
|
BASIC UK:
The Grayston Centre, 2nd Floor, 28 Charles Square London N1 6HT,
+44-(0)20-7324 4680 |