Government and Military

Ministry Of Defence

Old War Office Building Whitehall London SW1A 2EU

MINISTER OF STATE FOR

THE ARMED FORCES

17 April 2002

Dear Norman [Lamb]

Thank you for your letter of 11 March to the Prime Minister enclosing one from your constituent, Angie Zelter of "Trident Ploughshares", c/o Valley Farmhouse, East Runton, Cromer, about nuclear weapons. I am replying as this matter fails within my area of responsibility as Minister of State for the Armed Forces.

Ms Zelter has been in regular correspondence with the Ministry of Defence over a period of years on the matter of the UK nuclear deterrent, and officials have already provided answers to most of the points she makes in her letter. I do not intend to cover old ground and will, therefore, concentrate on the three specific points she raises towards the end.

The first reflects the incorrect assumption, which seems recently to have gained currency, that there is a problem with the supply of tritium to support our nuclear deterrent forces. Lewis Moonie told the House of Commons earlier this year (Official Report, 12 February 2002, Column 176W), the UK has sufficient stocks of tritium to meet the needs of the Trident programme for the foreseeable future. Your constituent also raises the issue of tritium discharge in the context of HMS Vanguard’s refit at Devonport. I can assure her that the safety of the local population, the dockyard workforce and environment was taken fully into account in the decision to concentrate nuclear refitting at Devonport. Moreover, we welcomed the Environment Agency’s decision to recommend approval of DML’s application to vary radioactive waste discharge levels. These approvals are essential for Vanguard Class submarine refits, and I can confirm that the anticipated levels of discharge are virtually indistinguishable from naturally occurring levels of background radiation.

Turning to the point your constituent makes about Scotland, Faslane and Coulport are clearly of key importance in operating the UK’s nuclear deterrent forces. They also play a full part in the local community, including the provision of a significant number of jobs. The general impact on the UK of full independence for Scotland, let alone the effect this would have on specific aspects of Government policy, including nuclear weapons, can only be a matter for speculation. At present, of course, defence and foreign policy are powers reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act.

We currently have no plans for a replacement for Trident, and no decision on a successor system is yet needed. There is an ongoing process of work to ensure that we have all the information necessary to make that decision when the time comes. Our current fleet of four ballistic missile submarines will enable us to maintain continuous deterrent patrols over the lifetime of the Trident force.

Finally, I should like to clarify a point of detail.

Your constituent twice suggests that our nuclear weapons could not be used without breaching international law. As we have repeatedly made clear, this is not the case. Indeed, the Secretary of State for Defence assured Parliament on Wednesday 10 April 2002, (Official Report, Column 3OW) that we would not use our weapons, whether conventional or nuclear, contrary to international law.

I hope this is helpful.

The Rt Hon Adam Ingram JP MP

Printer friendly version

Home | Top