Letter to Matt Carter, General Secretary of the Parliamentary Labour Party concerning its discussion of a motion on Trident.

Web version of a letter published on 28th October 2005 by Stuart Parkinson, SGR

Dear Sir

I am writing to inform you that Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR) – an independent UK organisation of over 800 science, design and technology professionals – fully supports the motion being presented to the Parliamentary Labour Party questioning the wisdom of spending billions on Trident replacement.

This issue was discussed at the recent SGR AGM and there was general agreement that we should express our long-standing opposition to nuclear weapons by supporting this motion.

Our reasons for opposition to any updating or replacement of the Trident nuclear weapons system are manifold:

• Such action would contravene the UK Government's support of the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) which requires all states to take a strong stance on non-proliferation and disarmament. It would send exactly the wrong message to countries which we are seeking to convince not to develop or deploy weapons of mass destruction.
• It would not increase the security of the UK. Not only has the Government admitted that there is no direct or near-term military threat to the UK, but nuclear weapons are also no defence against the significant security threats facing the UK today or in the near future, such as terrorism or climate change.
• It would not be independent. The current Trident system is almost wholly dependent upon the US military. Even the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston is part-managed by US corporations. This close relationship is especially of concern because of the US Government’s current attempts to blur the lines between nuclear and conventional warfare.
• It would be hugely expensive. The estimated £15 billion it would cost for replacement could be better spent in many other areas, not least health, education, international development or environmental protection.

We note that many senior figures in politics have also questioned the sense in replacing Trident, ranging from the late Robin Cook to Michael Portillo.

Hence we urge the PLP to support this motion and also to take further action to prevent the Government opting for a Trident replacement. At the very least, the PLP needs to force a full parliamentary debate on this issue. A decision of this magnitude should not be taken behind closed doors.

Yours sincerely

Dr Stuart Parkinson
Director, SGR

cc Gordon Prentice MP, John Austin MP and Paul Flynn MP

Back to Arms Control For further information contact Philip Webber Send correspondence about the web-site to webmanager@sgr.org.uk This page last updated: 11th February 2006 © SGR 1997-2006