Time to target Trident

Katy Clark MP

Over the last few months the debate about Trident has heated up with the TUC voting to oppose the purchase of a new generation of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately Labour Party Conference in Manchester did not debate the issue with all motions on the subject being ruled out of order. Forty Labour MPs immediately wrote to the Chair of the Labour Party Hazel Blears during conference week expressing concern that no debate was taking place even though it is quite possible a decision will be taken before we meet again.

We are told that it is likely that this decision will be taken by the Cabinet soon and that the Government will then present their proposal in a White Paper which will enable a public debate to take place. Parliament has been promised a full debate and a vote.

For many in the country, the issue of nuclear weapons is quite far down their agenda. Many are too young to remember the mass protests in the 1980s. However there will be huge implications if we go ahead and purchase a new generation of nuclear weapons. Apart from the cost - and the most recent estimate is that a new system will cost £76 billion over its lifetime - any new system is likely to be an escalation and therefore a breach of the Non Proliferation Treaty. Surely it is a dangerous hypocrisy to preach to others such as Iran and North Korea against them acquiring nuclear technology when we ourselves continue to escalate.

We live in a changed world. The Cold War is over. The threats we face are very different than those faced by previous generations. Many believe a nuclear defence policy is irrelevant in the face of terrorism. .

The main argument seems to be that a new generation of nuclear weapons is about Britain's status in the world - our place at the bargaining table. The belief that influence is secured by our status as a nuclear power. However our influence depends on our actions, how we are perceived, not the technology we possess. Surely our influence in the world is reduced because of our adherence to US foreign policy, most recently our refusal to take an independent line on the crisis in Lebanon. And as we all know the threat of terrorism has only increased as the fundamentalists use British foreign policy to recruit.

More than ever it is clear we do not have an "independent nuclear deterrent". Our systems are almost wholly reliant on the USA which of course helps to bind us further into their foreign policy initiatives.

We can enhance our status in the world not by spending billions on a capacity for destruction but by making a stand against nuclear proliferation and by abiding by our international obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The coming months are crucial. We have the arguments on our side. If we can widen the debate then there is a real possibility we can stop a new Trident.