All four of Wokingham’s MP backed the renewal of Trident in a Parliamentary vote last night – and afterwards John Redwood praised Jeremy Corbyn’s stance against nuclear weapons as “magnificent”.
Theresa May made her first speech in the House of Commons as Prime Minister, telling MPs that the nuclear weapons fitted to submarines “will remain essential to the UK’s security today as it has for over 60 years, and for as long as the global security situation demands, to deter the most extreme threats to the UK’s national security and way of life and that of the UK’s allies.”
Mrs May pointed out that intelligence reports suggested North Korea had enough material to create a dozen nuclear weapons.
“It also has a long-range ballistic missile, which it claims can reach America, and which is potentially intended for nuclear delivery. There is, of course, the danger that North Korea might share its technology or its weapons with other countries or organisations that wish to do us harm,” she added.
Although Dr Phillip Lee (Bracknell), Rob Wilson (Reading East) and John Redwood (Wokingham) didn’t speak in the debate, they all voted for trident.
The Government won the motion comfortably, with 471 MPs voting to renew Trident and 116 against, with one abstention.
Writing afterwards, Mr Redwood said he voted for Trident because: “I campaigned on the Conservative Manifesto without signalling my dispute with this measure in it. I did so because I agree with the government that a submarine force is the best means of retaining an independent deterrent, with at least one submarine always at sea in waters unknown.”
He also took time to praise Mr Corbyn’s stance on nuclear weapons, despite it going against official Labour party policy.
“It is not easy to go against the party line, but I certainly found it necessary when we were battling to get an EU referendum, and trying to stop the transfer of more powers to the EU,” he wrote. “There was something magnificent about his determination to change the policy and stick to his principles when he had so many votes and voices against him, even though I disagree with his viewpoint.”
Rob Wilson said: “Despite successes over recent decades in limiting the number of states with nuclear capabilities, we cannot rule out a major shift in the international security situation which would put us under grave threat. That is why I do not believe it would be right to give up this capability unilaterally.”
Dr Phillip Lee wrote an article in 2007 about Trident, in which he argued that to decommission the weapons and then have to bring them back at an unspecified point in the future could cost lives due to the delays in making the new missiles.
He said: “History painfully teaches us that within the twenty years required to develop a replacement nuclear weapon system, world events could lead to dramatic changes in global threats. I believe, therefore, that the sensible and prudent decision is to retain a modest nuclear deterrent capability.”
Theresa May’s speech to the House of Commons
There is no greater responsibility as Prime Minister than ensuring the safety and security of our people. That is why I have made it my first duty in this House to move today’s motion so that we can get on with the job of renewing an essential part of our national security for generations to come.
For almost half a century, every hour of every day, our Royal Navy nuclear submarines have been patrolling the oceans, unseen and undetected, fully armed and fully ready—our ultimate insurance against nuclear attack.
Our submariners endure months away from their families, often without any contact with their loved ones, training relentlessly for a duty they hope never to carry out. I hope that, whatever our views on the deterrent, we can today agree on one thing: that our country owes an enormous debt of gratitude to all our submariners and their families for the sacrifices they make in keeping us safe.
As a former Home Secretary, I am familiar with the threats facing our country. In my last post, I was responsible for counter-terrorism for over six years. I received daily operational intelligence briefings about the threats to our national security, I chaired a weekly security meeting with representatives of all the country’s security and intelligence agencies, military and police, and I received personal briefings from the director-general of MI5.
Over those six years as Home Secretary I focused on the decisions needed to keep our people safe, and that remains my first priority as Prime Minister.
The threats that we face are serious, and it is vital for our national interest that we have the full spectrum of our defences at full strength to meet them. That is why, under my leadership, this Government will continue to meet our NATO obligation to spend 2% of our GDP on defence.
We will maintain the most significant security and military capability in Europe, and we will continue to invest in all the capabilities set out in the strategic defence and security review last year. We will meet the growing terrorist threat coming from Daesh in Syria and Iraq, from Boko Haram in Nigeria, from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, from al-Shabaab in east Africa, and from other terrorist groups planning attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
We will continue to invest in new capabilities to counter threats that do not recognise national borders, including by remaining a world leader in cyber-security.
