09 February 2007
Anti-nuclear campaigners this week accused Defence Secretary Des Browne of 'evasiveness' over the true cost to taxpayers of the proposed Trident weapons replacement system.
Despite tough questioning from the Commons' defence select committee on February 6, Browne steadfastly refused to reveal full estimates for the cost of replacing and maintaining the Trident nuclear submarine fleet, which will become obsolete in 30 years.
Although Browne and Ministry of Defence officials reiterated that the cost of purchasing new submarines, warheads and support infrastructure had been estimated at £20bn, he acknowledged that the annual maintenance costs would also eat up a significant proportion of the MoD's annual defence budget.
'We estimate that [through-life costs] as between 5% and 6% of the MoD budget,' Browne told MPs.
But with the department facing tight spending constraints during a period in which it has other significant costs – such as the military action in Iraq – MPs and policy experts have demanded a firm estimate so taxpayers can assess the affordability of the new system.
Critics have claimed the figure could vary substantially, because 'through life' costs meant maintenance spending over 30 years.
Asked by the committee what the MoD estimated in monetary terms, Browne said: 'Clearly we need to be more accurate and have more transparency as we move towards the contract [stage].'
Kate Hudson, chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: 'It is shameful that our defence secretary has not given MPs and the British people answers to so many questions of vital importance on Trident replacement. The government must provide information transparently and must allow for a full consultation where all options, including non-replacement, are considered.'
CND sources said that they believed a more accurate estimate for the entire project would be £76bn – a figure compiled by Liberal Democrat defence spokesman Nick Harvey.
Browne did, however, attempt to answer critics who have called for the extended use of the current 'Vanguard' submarine fleet. Academics have estimated that the current fleet could be maintained and used for a further 15 years.
But Browne's MoD team have restricted the extended life of the MoD's four Trident-carrying subs to a further five years – at a cost of hundreds of millions of pounds - while replacements are procured.
Browne argued that extending the use of the Vanguard fleet beyond an additional five years meant that the submarines would require increasingly expensive maintenance and, therefore, would be out of use more regularly. The cost of maintenance beyond the additional five years 'would run into billions of pounds,' MoD officials claimed.
'There would be too much risk to national security and poor value for money,' Browne concluded.
PFfeb2007
