UK Nuclear Deterrent

Debate between Luke Pollard and Desmond Swayne

Monday 2nd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

As part of our commitment to non-proliferation, we continue to abide by all the measures of the treaties we have signed. Our renewal of our nuclear deterrent is necessary in a more dangerous world. As the ultimate guarantor of our security, it will be central to this Government’s defence plans in the future.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

In pursuit of deterrence, will the Minister recommit to first use when either the strategic or tactical situation demands it?

[Luke Pollard]

If I read out our nuclear playbook at the Dispatch Box, the right hon. Gentleman would be one of the first people to raise concerns, so I decline that polite invitation to detail our nuclear strategy. That ambiguity is absolutely certain, but we do not have a first-strike policy, as he will know. As the only European NATO member to dedicate our nuclear deterrent in the defence of all NATO member states, we maintain that capacity not only in support of the United Kingdom. That is an important part of our collective deterrence.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Luke Pollard and Desmond Swayne

Monday 19th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

I do indeed. Our commitment to NATO is unshakeable, as is our commitment to our European friends, especially those along NATO’s eastern flank that are being threatened by Russian aggression. We will continue to work with our friends, including: with Germany via the new Trinity House agreement; through the refreshed Lancaster House agreement; and with our EU friends via the security and defence agreement signed today. That is a really important part of keeping Britain safe at home and secure abroad.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State delay putting before the House the remedial order until he is certain that the Government have a way of delivering the Prime Minister’s commitment to preventing Gerry Adams from claiming compensation?

Fiscal Policy: Defence Spending

Debate between Luke Pollard and Desmond Swayne

Monday 27th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

I agree with my hon. Friend that we have to spend more on defence. I think everyone in this House agrees with that, and that is why this Labour Government are spending more on defence: an extra £2.9 billion as announced in the Budget and a pathway to spending 2.5% of our GDP, which will be announced later in the spring.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

It was the Minister’s assessment of costs that drove the decision to decommission Bulwark and Albion. But if the Brazilians are going to buy them, they cannot have been that bad, can they?

[Luke Pollard]

Let me say very clearly to the right hon. Gentleman that we inherited a position where it was not planned that Albion and Bulwark would go to sea for a single day before they were decommissioned—that was the plan we inherited from the Conservative Government. We are looking at new capabilities as part of the strategic defence review, and the Defence Secretary has also committed from this Dispatch Box to the multi-role supply ship project, to provide littoral and landing capabilities for our brilliant Royal Marines, who have a bright future in the strategic defence review.

Chagos Islands: UK-US Defence Relationship

Debate between Luke Pollard and Desmond Swayne

Monday 2nd December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

I am not certain whether the SNP’s record on national security really gives the hon. Member the platform that he is pretending to have on this one. I recognise, however, that he is trying to make a serious point about the deal. When the deal is signed, it will come before the House in the usual way. That will allow parliamentarians of all parties to look at the detail of the deal and take a judgment, and the House will vote in the usual way, as it will do on other treaties.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

What is it in particular that the new regime in Mauritius have doubts about? It is that they want more money, isn’t it?

[Luke Pollard]

I think it is quite normal for any new Government to look again at a deal signed by their immediate predecessor—[Interruption.] The reason I say that is that when they look at the deal, they will see that the detail is convincing; just as it will be for our US friends, because it is a deal backed by the entirety of the US security apparatus that secures the future operation of the UK-US base well into the future and deals with the uncertainty around the base that existed until the deal was made. Hopefully, the right hon. Member will back the deal when the details come before the House—let us see.