Why is Diane Abbott the only Labour leadership candidate to oppose Trident?

I find it surprising and disappointing that only one of the five contenders for the Labour leadership is willing to oppose the replacement of Trident.

I can understand that as a former Foreign Secretary David Milliband may be accused of double standards by carrying out a u-turn on policy, but the other candidates should reconsider their position.

There is no logical reason behind defending Trident.  According to CND:

• 58% of people say that "given the state of the country's finances, the Government should scrap the Trident nuclear missile system" in an Independent/ComRes poll of September 2009 (Table 7)

• 54% of the public say Britain should "no longer have any nuclear deterrent" in a Gurdian/ICM poll of July 2009 (Table 8)

• Only 30% of the public would spend £20bn on Trident when offered alternatives of spending on nurses salaries or affordable homes, in a YouGov poll for The People newspaper from July 2009 (Page 4)

• 72% of the British public, in a poll in March 2007, did not support the government's plans to replace Trident - More4/Populus poll.

• 59% of the British public oppose replacing Trident when presented with the cost of £25 billion just to acquire a replacement system. (The equivalent of building around 1,000 new schools at current prices) - ICM poll, July 2006

• 73% of Scottish people thought it was wrong that £50 billion might be spent on a replacement for Trident.
• 64% were against nuclear weapons being based in Scotland for another 50 years. ICM poll carried out for Scottish CND, January 2007

I would imagine if potential Labour voters were polled there would be an even larger percentage supporting the scrapping of Trident.  I therefore cannot see why it would be politically damaging to call for Trident to be scrapped.  Do Andy Burnham, Ed Balls and Ed Milliband really believe that it is in the country's interest to renew its nuclear deterent?

What's more, unlike when the issue of Trident first came up 2006 before the recession, we really cannot afford to be wasting billions on such a weapons system.  By scrapping Trident renewal we could save thousands of jobs in the public sector, surely on economic grounds alone this is a more sensible option.

Although Trident is not the only important issue in the leadership campaign, having a candidate who is clearly against renewal and is also questioning the mission in Afghanistan gives us a clear signal as to which direction they will take on foreign policy in the future.  That is why I am supporting Diane Abbott.

Scrapping Trident should be more than about saving money

The Liberal Democrats seem to be gaining quite a lot of support by their proposal to scrap Trident, but if you look into their policies further, you will find that they still wish to keep our nuclear 'deterrent', and the main reason for scrapping Trident is about saving money.

Their policy reads:

Liberal Democrats do not believe that the UK can afford the billions of pounds the Government wants to spend on a like-for-like replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system. Full-scale Trident is a cold war system that we no longer need nor can afford. We believe that less expensive alternatives should be considered.

While it is correct that Trident is a waste of money, which we cannot afford at the moment, this should not be the motivator for scrapping Trident.

The Green Party policy is very clear, saying:

Not replace Trident.We cannot conceive of any circumstances in which we would use these expensive and immoral weapons; we would decommission the existing system and not renew it.

As a child I remember seeing the following 'Protect and Survive' public information film, and it scared the hell out of me.  Since then I have been vehemently against the ownership of nuclear weapons and do not believe there is any justification in keeping them.



No country should have the right to own such weapons of mass destruction.  To use the is illegal under international law, as the kill indiscrimately.

We are also hypocrites to keep our own weapons and demand that other countries should not hold them.

If we want to be brokers for peace in the world we should ditch our nuclear programme now and lead by example.

The Green Party - A real committment to peace

 (Picture taken from www.stopwar.org.uk)

It is with dismay, but not surprise that the 3 main parties have little to offer when it comes to our defence policy.  Labour, Conservative and Lib Dems are all committed to keeping our troops in Afghanistan, even though there is no sign of end to the war.  In fact, by the end of the year we will have been in longer than the Soviet Union, who could not take control of the country with a much larger force than we have committed.

The Green Party offers a real alternative with a commitment to remove our troops from Afghanistan, as it is now absolutely clear that our security has been compromised, not improved, by our part in the counter-productive invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

On nuclear weapons Labour and the Tories are committed to renewing Trident.  The Lib Dems have said they will cancel it but keep a minimum nuclear deterrent.  The Green Party would not only scrap Trident but would decommission the existing system and not renew it.

So the choice is clear.  If you want to commit our country to a secure and peaceful future vote Green.