Royal Navy: Nuclear Submarines Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Defence

Royal Navy: Nuclear Submarines

Lord Swire Excerpts
Thursday 15th January 2026

(1 day, 8 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Coaker Portrait Lord Coaker (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Of course, the Government’s position is to maintain the position that we have had over many decades. I appreciate the point that the noble Lord raises. He will know—because the debate often rages about this—that the fact he can say that and can speak without fear or favour in this Chamber in a democracy is part of why we keep the nuclear deterrent: to defend our democracy from those who seek to undermine it.

Lord Swire Portrait Lord Swire (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, the SNP in Edinburgh maintains that it is committed to the future of Faslane as a base while at the same time it says that it would want to rid an independent Scotland of nuclear weapons. What discussions does the Minister have on a regular basis with Edinburgh about that position, and how many jobs from the nuclear programme are going to be created in Scotland?

Lord Coaker Portrait Lord Coaker (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Lord is quite right. Thousands of jobs are dependent on the nuclear deterrent in Scotland and across the UK. I often make the point around the SNP, and we see its inconsistent position with respect to nuclear weapons. I remind the noble Lord that, a few years ago, the SNP’s position was not only opposition to nuclear weapons but opposition to NATO. When it changed that position at an SNP conference, some SNPs resigned from the party as a result. Now it has a position of opposition to nuclear weapons but of maintaining membership of NATO. The SNP needs to be reminded that NATO is a nuclear alliance.