Heavy Defeat For Trident Axe Bid
A proposal calling for the UK's nuclear deterrent Trident not to be renewed has been defeated in the House of Commons.
Just 35 MPs backed the motion, brought by the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru, but it was defeated by a majority of 329 after it was opposed by 364 MPs.
Backers of the Opposition Day motion were expected to include a number of Labour MPs and at least one Tory despite both main parties instructing their MPs to back replacing the ageing Vanguard-class submarines which carry the missiles.
Angus Robertson, shadow SNP spokesman for defence, argued that the case was "stronger than ever'' to embrace the non-replacement of the programme.
During an Opposition Day debate in the Commons, he said the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had the "wrong priorities'', investing billions on nuclear weapons which it could never use, but not properly managing the conventional armed forces.
The motion was aimed at highlighting the two parties' commitment to scrapping Trident and instead using what they claim would be ÂŁ100 billion saved to ease austerity measures.
Moray MP Mr Robertson went on: "The time has come to put down a marker about scrapping Trident and not replacing these weapons of mass destruction.
"I've yet to hear a supporter of Trident convincingly explain in what circumstances they are prepared to justify the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children and cause massive environmental damage to the world for generations to come.''
But Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said the Government was committed to retaining the continuous at-sea deterrent, adding: "What we cannot gamble with is tomorrow's security.
"That is why this Government and all previous governments for the last six decades have retained an operationally independent nuclear deterrent.
"We have to plan for a major direct nuclear threat to this country or to our Nato allies that might emerge over the 50 years that the next generation of our submarines will be in service.
"In a world that is getting more dangerous there are no alternatives that offer the level of protection and security that this country needs.''
He dismissed Mr Robertson's claim that the total cost including through-life costs would be near ÂŁ100 billion, but said he could not yet confirm a figure.
In his contribution, shadow defence secretary Vernon Coaker argued it would do "more harm than good'' to abandon the nuclear deterrent unilaterally at this stage in the disarmament process.
The Labour frontbencher added: "In the current climate it would make Britain less secure and would send out exactly the wrong signals at a very sensitive moment in international relations.''