Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Defence

Oral Answers to Questions

Julian Lewis Excerpts
Monday 19th December 2011

(12 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, I do not think that at all. In fact, not spending that money would prevent us from preserving the option for the next Parliament to take the decision. The hon. Gentleman is fond of pointing out the problems in respect of the capability for the nuclear deterrent, but let me assure him that the work we are undertaking will have benefits for other classes of nuclear submarines in future— particularly in respect of the primary propulsion systems, for example with the PWR3. There are real benefits from doing this work—not just for the security of the nation in the short term, but for the long term as well.

Julian Lewis Portrait Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Given that both the Polaris and Trident submarines came in on budget and on time, is that not a good precedent for the successor system? Will the Minister take the opportunity to repeat in resounding terms the assurance that the Prime Minister gave to Conservative MPs when the coalition was formed—that Trident will be renewed, whether the Liberal Democrats like it or not?

Peter Luff Portrait Peter Luff
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I believe that, notwithstanding the views of the hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn), no programme is subject to greater scrutiny in the House than the nuclear deterrent. That is one of the reasons for the accuracy of our costings. Let me assure my hon. Friend that the primary responsibility for our nation is the security of the country, that the nuclear deterrent is the ultimate guarantee of the country’s security, and that we stand firmly behind it.