- Defence policy
- Equipment and support
- Modernising defence
- Aviation
- Marine
- Land vehicles
- Security
- HR and training
- Defence estates (DIO)
News updates
Twitter updates
Facebook
Email
Print
MPs visit Faslane in Scots independence inquiry
30 August 2012
Scotland will hold a referendum on independence from the United Kingdom in 2014, and the Scottish Government has said that if Scots vote to break from the UK, an independent Scotland would not be willing to continue to house the UK's nuclear weapons fleet.
The Scottish Affairs Committee has already heard that the remainder of the UK would be unlikely to wish to host its nuclear weapons in what would effectively become a foreign country.
The visit aimed to help MPs on the committee assess the potential impact on the 6,500 civilian and service jobs the base currently sustains as well as associated effects on supply chains and the local economy should HMNB Clyde, and the nearby Royal Naval Armaments Depot at Coulport, relocate.
Committee chair Ian Davidson said: "We have been told that Faslane's facilities could be replicated at an existing English naval base, but that the Royal Naval Armaments Depot at Coulport is unique in the UK - it is equipped with highly specialised and sensitive equipment for safely moving and storing missiles and warheads, and building a replacement could take a decade or more.
"The timeline for separation is much shorter than that – which could mean that effectively the UK's nuclear weapons will be based in a foreign country for many years. There are also of course huge cost implications of making such a transition."
The committee said it would publish a report on the defence impacts of Scottish independence "shortly".
HAVE YOUR SAY
30 August 2012
The impact on job losses both directly and indirectly, will be the sole responsibility of the SNP's stance on UK nuclear facilities inScotland. I see no good reason why we should concern ourselves about a foreign countries employment figures.
As far as Coulport is concerned,move it lock stock and barrel to the USA. Kings Bay submarine base could no doubt accept it,and I am sure we could come to an amicable arrangement with the US unlike an independent Scotland who wish to see the back of us.
I think I'm right in saying that the Trident missiles are sent to the US for maintenence in any case,so it would not only save us money,but be more efficient all round.
No doubt there will be cries from certain parties on here,in regards to us becoming another US state. I think it's time to worry about ourselves instead of a SNP government that wants it bread buttered on both sides.
michael - notts
30 August 2012
If the Scots want us to leave then let them pay for us to leave, and when the Scots are bankrupt it will show just how idiotic the SNP are.
Ian Flude - Sheffield
30 August 2012
michael - notts
Watching BBC Parliament when the Scottish Affairs Committee debated the impact of separation on defence they discussed this subject and apparently the deal with the US on the missiles is that they are shared between the US and UK so a missile may be in an Ohio class SSBN go into maintenance and then be loaded into a Vanguard SSBN and vice versa, it is on a round robin basis.
On the question of separation the referendum is to be held in October 2014 so is still two years away. The latest opinion poll puts support for separation at 28% and the union at 55% so we will have to see how or if that changes between now and then.
Graham - High Wycombe
30 August 2012
Graham,
Thanks for the info on Trident,so in the event of Scotts independence it would make sense even more to go to the US.
I do hope that Soctland stays in the union,it's a matter of how much can Salmond play on Scotts nationalism. I just hope the majority of the voters see how much stronger they are staying in the Union.
Two years is not so far away,and I would imagine (hope),that contingency plans are already being drawn up in case of the worst scenario.
It will be a huge effort to replicate all the facilities of Faslane south of the border,never mind the eye watering costs of such a move.
Looking at the size of the Faslane complex in comparsion to the Plymouth or Portsmouth,it doesn't seem to me that either have the spare capacity to build on that scale. Any takers for Milford Haven.
michael - notts
30 August 2012
michael - notts
Milford Haven is probably the only realistic alternative in the UK but an agreement with the US is at least equally feasible. Both have to be explored in case.
However I think Alastair Darling is an excellent choice to lead the 'Better Together' campaign and still remain hopeful of a positive outcome in favour of the union.
Graham - High Wycombe
31 August 2012
I hope the Scots give Salmond a bloody nose in 2014 so that we can then get to work and rebuild our United Kingdom from a position of unity rather than self doubt.
Britain together is a powerful force in the world; Britain shattered by regionalism will leave it as footnote in history alongside the words "what might have been...
BUT we need to start making things again and have the vision, invention and dynamism which "off the shelf procurement" is destined to destroy by stealth. If we lose the ability to make and sell then we deserve all we get. Politics needs to rediscover vision instead of just focusing on problem management.
Michael - Hertfordshire
31 August 2012
With the politicans off all paries we have in this country then sad to say we will prbarbly end up as a foot note in history, as the only vision they have it that at the end of their nose.
Ian Flude - Sheffield
03 September 2012
"Better together", if this is better, God help us when things get any worse! Roll on 2014 and we can decide for ourselves, the choice being:
a) Indepenence - the people of Scotland making decisions for the good of Scotland, the money raised in scotland being spent in Scotland.
b) Status quo - no I never liked their music either!
Jim - Greenock, Scotland