MP’s claim of support for nuclear power in Highlands challenged

 By John Davidson john.davidson@hnmedia.co.uk, Northern Times 11th June 2024

https://www.northern-times.co.uk/news/msp-s-claim-of-support-for-nuclear-power-in-highlands-challe-352901/

An anti-nuclear campaigner has hit out at a claim made by Highland MSP Edward Mountain that people in the region want nuclear power.

The Conservative MSP hosted an energy summit in Strathpeffer last Friday, bringing together industry experts and members of the public.

The aim was to discuss the future of energy production and provision in the Highlands, with panellists including representatives from SSEN, Storegga, Highland Fuels, Highland Renewables, and the Anaerobic Digestion and Bioresources Association.

June 13, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Scottish Greens brand Labour’s commitment to nuclear weapons ‘obscene and immoral’

Chris Jarvis 9 June 2024  https://bright-green.org/2024/06/09/scottish-greens-brand-labours-commitment-to-nuclear-weapons-a-obscene-and-immoral/

Labour’s commitment to the UK’s nuclear arsenal has been branded an ‘obscene and immoral waste of money’ by the Scottish Green Party. The party’s external affairs spokesperson Ross Greer went on to say that nuclear weapons are a ‘moral evil’ and urged voters who support a nuclear-free world to vote Green.

Greer said: “Nuclear weapons are a moral evil and an obscene and immoral waste of hundreds of billions of pounds. It is a vast money pit that could be far better spent eradicating poverty, tackling the climate crisis and transforming public services like the NHS.

“Trident does nothing to make us safer, and has no place in Scotland. The so-called ‘triple-lock’ that Labour is proposing is a multi-billion bung to a weapons industry already enjoying eye watering profits from the UK’s aggressive foreign policy.

The message from Sir Keir Starmer is very simple. If you care about peace and global security, don’t vote Labour.”

Greer added: “With Labour and Tories in lockstep on nuclear weapons, the only way we will disarm Scotland’s waters is as an independent nation.

“I look forward to the day when an independent Scotland can finally take its place on the world stage and join the dozens of other nations who have signed the Treaty on the Prohibition on Nuclear Weapons.”

June 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Keir Starmer’s policy on nuclear weapons

Prof Nick Megoran
School of geography, politics and sociology, Newcastle University

It is ironic that news of Keir Starmer’s plan to restate Labour’s commitment to “a ‘triple lock’ for the UK’s nuclear deterrent” (Keir Starmer to declare Labour as ‘party of national security’, 2 June) emerged on the same day that Toshiko Tanaka, a survivor of the Hiroshima atomic bomb, addressed a spellbound meeting in London – organised by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the Quakers – about her childhood experiences in 1945.

She spoke of seeing the initial explosion that killed every one of her classmates. She recounted regaining consciousness with a mouth full of dirt, running home to a mother who could not recognise her own badly burnt daughter, and smelling the lingering stench of burning flesh as bodies were cremated. To this day, she struggles to sleep as new sores break out on her skin, and cannot see a grilled tomato without remembering the ghastly sight of skin peeling off the dying who staggered through her neighbourhood like zombies.

Through the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the UK is committed to the goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world. Starmer should formulate policy based on our legal and moral obligations, not a calculating attempt to win votes by looking tougher than the Tories.

Norman Rimmell
Darley Dale, Derbyshire

 Jeremy Corbyn is right – our political leaders are sticking their heads deeply in the sand. He could have added that if it’s possible for something to go wrong then you can be certain that one day it will. We may escape nuclear war, but accidental nuclear attack will, one day, happen. We’ve been extremely lucky to have escaped this so far, but eventually our luck will run out, unless we put a stop to this madness.

June 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

We should aim for nuclear disarmament – Plaid leader, UK

By Nick Bourne, BBC News, 9 June 24

Nuclear disarmament of the UK is something “we all should be aiming for”, according to Plaid Cymru’s leader Rhun ap Iorwerth.

But he said the UK’s defence force should be “well-funded”, able to “play their part in defending ourselves in peacekeeping roles” and ensures the welfare of military personnel after they leave service.

His comments come after Conservative minister Penny Mordaunt said in a general election debate Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin would doubt Labour’s willingness to use nuclear arms.

“I’m against the nuclear deterrent because I don’t think that is the kind of defence that we need and should be building in the 21st Century,” Mr ap Iorwerth told BBC Radio Wales’ Sunday Supplement……………………………

The Plaid leader shared a stage with leading figures from other political parties in Friday’s BBC general election debate……………………………….

The Green Party and the SNP both confirmed they opposed renewing Trident – arguing the money could be better spent on other areas of defence.  https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj551318ejlo

June 11, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Keir Starmer’s Trident triple lock: how Britain’s obsession with nuclear weapons has become part of election campaigns

The nuclear debate is also wrapped up in a gendered narrative that sees a commitment to nuclear weapons as strong, sensible, rational and masculine, and anything else as weak, irrational and feminine

Nick Ritchie, Professor, Department of Politics & International Relations, University of York, June 7, 2024  https://theconversation.com/keir-starmers-trident-triple-lock-how-britains-obsession-with-nuclear-weapons-has-become-part-of-election-campaigns-231834

With a campaign slogan of “change”, Keir Starmer is on a mission to persuade the electorate that the Labour party of 2024 is different to the one of 2019. Part of this is his unequivocal “triple lock” commitment to Trident, the UK’s nuclear weapon system.

At a time when the risk of a major European war is higher than it has been for decades, Starmer has reiterated his support for a massive programme to replace the Trident system (submarines, warhead, missiles and infrastructure), initiated by former Labour prime minister Tony Blair, in 2006. The triple lock is a commitment to the current programme to build four new ballistic missile submarines, keep one of the four always at sea on operational patrol and keep the system up to date.

Starmer is pushing back against Conservative claims that Labour is “weak”, “cannot be trusted” and is a “danger to national security”, accusations that have plagued his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong opponent of nuclear weapons.

Ideas of British national identity and Britain’s place in the world connect to a commitment to nuclear weapons. This identity is also tied to the idea of Britain as a military power in Europe, and Labour’s current identity of being strong on defence.

Prospective prime ministers are effectively required to publicly declare that they would be prepared to use nuclear weapons. Commitment to nuclear deterrence has become a de facto criterion for entering No 10.

Corbyn found this out in 2017 when he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr he would never use nuclear weapons first, or perhaps ever, if he were prime minister. In an unprecedented intervention, serving and former chiefs of the defence staff said that Corbyn’s response showed he “should not be trusted … with the nation’s defence and security”, and was unfit to be prime minister. Corbyn’s opposition to Trident is still being used to attack Starmer and Labour years later.

Starmer first signalled his commitment to Trident in 2021. Two years later, shadow defence secretary John Healey and shadow foreign secretary David Lammy declared their “unshakable” commitment to nuclear weapons as part of “Labour’s heritage”. But concerns about the morality and efficacy of using nuclear weapons have long divided Labour.

This is quite different to how nuclear weapons, which are based in Scotland, are framed by the Scottish National Party. In their conception of an independent Scotland’s national identity nuclear weapons are associated with imposed, undemocratic, Tory “imperialism” in which Labour has been complicit, and contrary to the SNP’s version of progressive internationalism. The SNP has said they would remove nuclear weapons from Scotland in the event of Scottish independence.

The nuclear debate is also wrapped up in a gendered narrative that sees a commitment to nuclear weapons as strong, sensible, rational and masculine, and anything else as weak, irrational and feminine.

The nuclear ‘consensus’

This Whitehall nuclear consensus closes down democratic debate on if, how and why the prime minister might use nuclear weapons. But views in the country are far from settled.

Recent polling shows 53% supports or strongly supports the UK having nuclear weapons, with about 30% opposed or strongly opposed. For women, the split is 50:50. For under 25s, it is 28% in favour and 43% against. In Scotland it is 35% in favour and 41% against (the rest say they don’t know).

The UK prime minister is one of a handful of people in the world with the power to inflict truly catastrophic levels of violence upon another society. Nuclear weapons should therefore be subject to intense scrutiny and debate, especially in a liberal democratic society. Starmer should appreciate this as a human rights lawyer, since practically any use of nuclear weapons would transgress international humanitarian and human rights law.

The nuclear programme is also hugely expensive. At a time when public services including health and education are under serious pressure, this arguably makes democratic debate even more necessary.

In March 2024 the House of Commons public accounts committee reported that the cost of the Ministry of Defence’s 10-year equipment plan was over budget by £17 billion, despite a budget increase of £46.3 billion. The greatest cause of this was the nuclear programme, where costs have increased by £38.2 billion (62%) since the last plan. The nuclear programme is now 34.5% of the £288.6 billion defence equipment plan, which itself is 49% of the total MoD budget.

In particular, the programme to deliver the new Dreadnought ballistic missile submarines has become the MoD’s highest priority. The department will redirect funds from conventional military programmes to support it if it can’t get more money from the Treasury. Labour and the Conservatives have both committed to increase the defence budget, especially for conventional forces, but have not said where the money will come from.

There are other political reasons why Starmer has come out strong for Trident. In particular, the thousands of jobs that the production and maintenance of nuclear-powered submarines supports in England and Scotland, and the power of the unions in the Labour party. The “triple lock” language also mirrors the triple lock commitment on pensions. This may appeal to older voters, who are more likely to vote (and vote Conservative).

Starmer’s “triple lock” might make sense politically from his perspective, but it is symptomatic of a nuclear consensus in Whitehall politics that brooks little dissent. The result is that debate on these difficult and serious security, economic, legal and moral choices on nuclear weapons routinely gets shut down and reduced to political performance. In the words of retired senior British Army officer General Sir Richard Shirreff, it infantilises a deadly serious issue.

June 9, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment