Nuclear Weapons (Hansard, 11 March 1986)

§ 14. Mr. Cohen
asked the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate, for the latest date for which figures are available, the total annual costs of all British nuclear weapons currently in deployment.

§ Mr. Stanley
It is not the practice to make available details of year-by-year expenditure on nuclear weapons. However, estimated expenditure on the nuclear strategic force in 1985–86 is shown in table 2.3 of volume 2 of the "Statement on the Defence Estimates 1985".

§ Mr. Cohen
Is not that a chronic and enormous waste of money, which would be better spent on social provision and jobs in peaceful manufacture? Will not the billions of pounds spent on Trident be a further appalling imposition, which will not make the British people any safer? Should we not be seriously negotiating on the Gorbachev proposals for nuclear disarmament?

§ Mr. Stanley
Our expenditure on deterrence is a fraction of what we would have to spend if deterrence broke down.

§ Mr. Leigh
Is my right hon. Friend aware that spending on nuclear weapons as a proportion of a total defence budget has remained remarkably constant under Labour and Conservative Governments in recent years, never dipping below 1 per cent. or rising above 3 per cent.? Does he agree that if spending on nuclear weapons represents just 2.8 per cent. of our total defence budget, that is a remarkably good investment for the British public to maintain their peace and security?

§ Mr. Stanley
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. It is an extremely cost-effective and relatively cheap insurance policy.

§ Mr. Skinner
How can the Government claim that the money is well spent, especially in view of the announcement of the £9.8 billion that is spent on Trident, when the same Government could not find more than 40p for the old-age pensioners a few days ago and yesterday came to the Dispatch Box and announced that prescription charges will go up by 1,000 per cent.? Do the Government not have a strange language of priorities?

§ Mr. Stanley
The Government can justify the good sense of the expenditure on the modernisation of our strategic deterrents in exactly the same way as the Government whom the hon. Gentleman supported no doubt justified their expenditure on the modernisation of the Chevaline deterrent.