From the BBC we see that the LibDems are trying to carve out a political niche over the future of our nuclear deterrent. Or a clear yellow streak of water, you might say.

Devon MPs have clashed over the future of the UK’s Trident nuclear submarines which are refitted at Devonport base in Plymouth.


Nick Harvey, Liberal Democrat candidate for Devon North, said the deterrent should be included in a defence review. Linda Gilroy, Labour candidate for Plymouth Devonport, said the Trident-based system was not for review. Their comments came ahead of a strategic defence review (SDR) due after the election. 

So what do the Conservatives think? This is from the British national public service broadcaster, so of course you have to wait until the BBC’s  paragraph 17 for that.

The need for an SDR is obvious and they should be regular and routine, which means that it is stunning for Labour to try to make a virtue out of the fact that, considering we’ve been at war for years now and they’ve been in power for 13 years, it is according to them…

The review has been described by the government as the first “root and branch” examination of Britain’s defence policy in 10 years.

However, it is Harvey, the LibDem Defence Spokesman ferchrissakes, who displays a woeful understanding of, er, defence.

“There are many other ways we can provide a meaningful nuclear deterrent short of four dedicated submarines solely for that purpose.” 

Name two.

Stealth bombers? They are much more detectable and more easily destroyed than submarines and without the range to cover the world in the absence of assistance from other countries. A land-based defence system? The only advantage that gives is the unwashed hippy tree-huggers have somewhere comfortable to camp whilst claiming the dole. Submarines are currently the best method available, with all of the others being either untenable or requiring robust allies which we can rely on. And considering that we can’t trust the US enough to back us up against Argentina, that isn’t a given.

The BBCs lack of interest in the views of the Party which will form the next Government is shown by the photograph on their story and the associated caption:

Doesn’t Gary Streeter, a Conservative MP since 1992 (and relegated to paragraph 17) even get a name check? Maybe this post should have been written for Biased-BBC instead. More from Harvey:

“If we progress as the government plans we are going to spend £104.2bn in today’s money retaining for about 2030 to 2060 a cold war-scale nuclear deterrent.

Its roots may have been in the Cold War; a face-off won not by lefty appeasement and gradual surrender but but capitalism and the strength of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, but we don’t have either of those two colossus’ around to help in the containment of the threats from China, North Korea, Iran and two dozen other totalitarian states that Obama believes are his New Best Buddies.

And what of paragraph 17?

 Gary Streeter, Conservative candidate for Devon South West, said: “Trident is one thing we have ruled out of the review because we are rock solid as a party that we do need a nuclear deterrent.

That’ll do. Nice and firm. No messing about. No need to prevaricate and confuse the issue by saying anything like…

“There’s an argument about the number of warheads we need and the number of submarines we need…

*sigh* And you were doing so well for a second.

As for the views of the person who will be making the final decsion on Trident? To paraphrase the words of Liam Fox on the subject: compare the cost of Trident replacement against the London Olympics. Same money, but one lasts for 30 years, the other for 2 weeks. No contest.