Results 1-20 of 21 for trident speaker:Michael Meacher

Opposition Day — [18th Allotted Day]: Economic Recovery and Welfare (19 Oct 2009)

Michael Meacher: ...in this country would agree with that. Also, let us be honest, we will need to cut public expenditure where it is ineffective, wasteful and unnecessary. That is why we should cut the £75 billion Trident renewal programme, which even the chiefs of staff now admit is irrelevant, the £10 billion-plus—whatever it is—ID cards that are not, according to their originators,...

Amendment of the Law (28 Apr 2009) has video

Michael Meacher: .... Housing, incidentally, is something that I think should not be decreased but should be substantially increased. First, some major spending projects have never been justified. ID cards have a cost of £5 billion, while Trident has cost £70 billion over 25 years. There have been Government IT follies, such as the £6 billion Home Office communications super-database. I am glad...

Deferred Division: Heathrow (2 Apr 2008) has video

Michael Meacher: ...stop going through the motions of consultation, when it is clear to everyone that they have already made up their minds. It happened with GM foods; it happened with nuclear power; it happened with Trident; and now it is happening with the third runway. The Government should listen more to the voices of the people—in this case, the long-suffering and much put-upon people of west...

Point of Order: Trident (14 Mar 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...deal to be said for the opposite argument. So it is today. Like others, I do not believe that the Government have adequately or convincingly answered certain fundamental questions about renewing Trident, in particular its true cost, why a decision has to be taken now, whom it is meant to deter, and how it is genuinely compatible with non-proliferation. Nor has there been a real opportunity...

Point of Order: Trident (14 Mar 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...-cold war environment today is, of course, utterly different from 20 years ago and even the Ministry of Defence cannot plausibly identify an enemy—either currently or in future—against whom Trident might be necessary. I will come on in a few moments to the uncertainties of future events in the world and to what I believe to be the central issue of the debate.

Point of Order: Trident (14 Mar 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...Furthermore, this is not an independent British nuclear deterrent, since the platform, the delivery system, the warheads, and even the onshore support, are all dependent on our US relationship. The Trident II D5 missiles are leased from the US missile pool under a system known in the trade as "rent a rocket".

Point of Order: Trident (14 Mar 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...too high to pay for the next 30 or 40 years. The enormous cost, of a distinctly vague and uncertain role, has already been touched on. Even MOD officials have admitted that the lifetime costs of Trident renewal could be two to three times the £15 billion to £20 billion figures mentioned in the White Paper—and that covers only the initial building of the system. That is...

Points of Order: Defence in the World (1 Feb 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...possibly a nuclear one against Iran's nuclear facilities. Secondly, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, East and Wallsend (Mr. Brown) mentioned, there is the decision on Trident. I shall comment briefly on both issues. I assume that if there was a US military attack on Iran there would not be any UK military involvement whatsoever, but I am not wholly convinced...

Points of Order: Defence in the World (1 Feb 2007)

Michael Meacher: ...would proceed in good faith towards full nuclear disarmament. That is what the deal says, and it will not convince anyone that we are genuinely fulfilling our side of the bargain if we replace the Trident system. I am glad that the Government are cutting the available operational warheads to fewer than 160 and making a corresponding reduction in the stockpile of warheads. I agree with...

Point of Order: Iraq and the wider Middle East (24 Jan 2007)

Michael Meacher: No, my time is running out. As for us, what moral authority do we have to say that Iran does not need nuclear weapons for self-protection when the UK Government are about to replace Trident with another round of nuclear weapons for exactly that quoted reason? The truth is that there is no legal basis or military rationale for an attack on Iran. The UN Security Council would never authorise...

Orders of the Day — Terrorism Bill (26 Oct 2005)

Michael Meacher: ...in Parliament to make that clear. However, those who might be affected include not only animal rights protesters, but those protesting against a revival of civil nuclear power, the replacement of Trident or genetically modified crops. It is no answer to say that prosecution could be pursued only with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. We should oppose the provisions...

Written Answers — Defence: Trident/Vanguard Replacements (10 Oct 2005)

Michael Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether a decision has been taken to replace the Trident D5 missiles and 4 Vanguard class submarines.

Opposition Day: National Health Service (2 Jul 1985)

Mr Michael Meacher: .... If the Government are so keen on private charity, why do they not cut defence expenditure in the way that they have cut expenditure on the National Health Service and introduce instead some flag days for Trident?

Opposition Day: National Health Service (2 Jul 1985)

Mr Michael Meacher: ...people are denied assistance on the ground that insufficient money is available to provide all the machines which are needed, while at the same time the Government are spending £13 billion on the Trident nuclear weapons system. I could go on with examples, because the list of cuts and those affected is indeed a long one.

Opposition Day: The Welfare State (22 Apr 1985)

Mr Michael Meacher: ...Government from finding another £2.5 billion with which to fight the miners, from finding £3 billion for the Falklands, or from finding another £12 billion over this decade for the defence budget, for Trident. It is all a matter of priorities—

Opposition Day: The National Health Service (5 Jul 1984)

Mr Michael Meacher: ...an additional £12·25 billion for the NHS budget this year. It is no good the Government saying that increased funding cannot be afforded. While the Government still opt to spend £10 billion on a Trident nuclear weapon system that we do not need, while they continue with the grotesque maldistribution of the nation's resources in handing out enormous tax relief of thousands...

Petition: National Health Service (Griffiths Report) (4 May 1984)

Mr Michael Meacher: ...to resolve. But it is not true to say that the money is not available and that we must therefore go down the Griffiths route of getting better management out of fewer resources. As long as the Government spend £10 billion on Trident as a new and unnecessary nuclear weapons system, fritter away £17 billion a year on keeping 4 million people unemployed, make massive tax handouts...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (23 Mar 1982)

Mr Michael Meacher: asked the Secretary of State for Defence what is the latest estimated total cost of Trident at current prices, taking account of all modifications adopted since the original announcement and of the effect of inflation since that date.

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (23 Mar 1982)

Mr Michael Meacher: Is it not true that a cost escalation of 50 per cent. during the last two years is well on target for the enormous over-shoot that is so typical of defence projects? Is it not true that, in time, Trident will require new warheads and new motors on its missiles, as in the case of Polaris? Is it not the case that the costs of those items—probably £2 billion to £3...

Orders of the Day — Government Expenditure (24 Oct 1979)

Mr Michael Meacher: ...handicapped and other under-privileged groups, they are also contemplating a huge expansion of public expenditure, particularly in the replacement of Polaris by a new nuclear weapons system, perhaps the Trident system, at a cost estimated to be in the order of £3,000 million to £4,000 million, an expansion of the police and the security services, the Special Patrol Group and...