Results 1-20 of 46 for trident speaker:John Stanley

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Expenditure (5 May 1987)

Mr John Stanley: I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. As we have said on many occasions, expenditure on Trident over the lifetime of that programme represents only about 3 per cent. of the defence budget.

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Expenditure (5 May 1987)

Mr John Stanley: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is right to draw the attention of the House to the fact that if the Trident programme were cancelled there would be a serious loss of jobs. As for jobs arising from expenditure on conventional forces, the commitment of the Opposition Front Bench to their long term objective to reduce defence expenditure to the average of the major NATO countries would...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: French Defence Minister (24 Mar 1987)

Mr John Stanley: I agree with my hon. Friend that that is one of the many unrealistic and impractical options that the Liberal-SDP alliance has put forward as an alternative to Trident. It is our assessment that if we were to take that route the time scale would not meet our needs and the costs would be substantially greater.

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: I am listening to the hon. Gentleman develop his case against Trident. Does he recall the interview given in "This Week, Next Week" by his right hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Dr. Owen) on 16 November, in which his right hon. Friend said that one of the options that he was considering was a very much reduced Trident missile with reduced deployment? Is that still one of the...

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: ...for 10 years and the first out-of-area amphibious exercise since the Falklands conflict. The year also saw new ship orders to the huge value of nearly £2,000 million— including the first Trident submarine, the seventh Trafalgar class SSN, three type 23 frigates, three Upholder class conventional submarines and the first auxiliary oiler replenishment ship. To the £2...

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: ...of ships in the fleet. We are most grateful to our RNR and RMR reservists for their commitment of time, enthusiasm and expertise to the Royal Navy. A centrepiece of our future naval programme is Trident, which is making very good progress, as was reflected in the latest recosting announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State last week, which, even after allowing for the effects...

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: ...tactical nuclear weapons against NATO surface ships and submarines. In Scotland, Labour's non-nuclear policy would mean the closure of Holy Loch, the loss of up to 2,500 jobs being created by the Trident construction programme at Faslane and Coulport, and the immediate loss of the entire SSBN refitting cycle on which over 2,000 jobs at Rosyth are currently dependent. The Labour party's...

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: ...wholly satisfied that, whatever the merits of a French system, that is simply not compatible with our requirement to replace the Polaris system in the mid-1990s. Finally, as the arguments about Trident being too big and too costly have been shot through, the argument about Trident being too American has, in a certain desperation I feel, been played more stridently not least by the right...

The Royal Navy (2 Feb 1987)

Mr John Stanley: ...States is not curdled is that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister went to Camp David in November and secured an unequivocal assurance and commitment from the American President to honour the Trident commitment. As far as Britain's Trident programme is concerned, I am disturbed by the doubts that the right hon. Member for Devonport now seems to be casting regularly on the extent to...

Opposition Day: Defence (3 Dec 1986)

Mr John Stanley: ...quite the most damaging and disastrous to which any British political party has committed itself in 40 years. The combination of scrapping Polaris, coupled with the decision not to proceed with Trident and the extraordinary commitment by the Leader of the Opposition, who says that he will remove Britain from the American nuclear umbrella, means that a Labour Government would leave the...

Orders of the Day — Defence: Second Day's Debate (1 Jul 1986)

Mr John Stanley: ...our nuclear capability and replace it with conventional capability does not stand up in defence terms. There is perhaps some doubt whether the Opposition are determined to use the whole of the Trident programme for conventional defence. We heard yesterday from my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (Mr. Couchman) that the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) has apparently said...

Orders of the Day — Defence: Second Day's Debate (1 Jul 1986)

Mr John Stanley: .... The alternative put forward by the SDP is either a deterrent that is below the minimum threshold and thus will not deter, or a deterrent which, if it is to be credible, will cost much more than Trident. I notice that the leader of the Liberal party, in a recent interview on "Weekend World", was asked how he viewed his relationship with the right hon. Member for Devonport. He replied:...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (11 Mar 1986)

Mr John Stanley: ...incorrect. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made a positive response in an INF context. It must be fundamental to an INF agreement that we deal with equal numbers of like systems. As for Trident, I do not understand the Opposition Front Bench's stance. It seems that they want to rest on wholly conventional defence. I suppose that means that they are prepared to rest behind...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (11 Mar 1986)

Mr John Stanley: My hon. Friend's question arises in connection with the Trident programme. In so far as we can manufacture the main elements of the Trident programme in this country, we are doing so. As the hon. Gentleman knows, over half the procurement of the Trident programme will fall to this country, including much high technology equipment.

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (11 Feb 1986)

Mr John Stanley: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence expects to be able to announce a revised costing for the Trident programme fairly soon. The Government's firm view is that, through the procurement of Trident, the United Kingdom can make an immeasurably greater contribution to deterrence and to the preservation of peace than by having conventional forces alone.

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (11 Feb 1986)

Mr John Stanley: We shall continue with the Trident programme.

Royal Navy (6 Feb 1986)

Mr John Stanley: ..., together with the seventh Trafalgar class nuclear-powered hunter-killer submarine. The Navy now has 14 SSNs in the fleet, with a further four on order. We expect to place the order for the first Trident submarine in the next few months. It is absolutely clear from the detailed and expert work carried out within the Government —and reflected in non-classified form in the open...

Royal Navy (6 Feb 1986)

Mr John Stanley: ...kidding himself when he claims that there is. It is also absolutely clear that no equivalent expenditure on conventional equipment can produce a fraction of the contribution of deterrence that Trident represents. No protection whatever is afforded against strategic nuclear blackmail, or worse, by any number of frigates, any number of tanks and any number of tactical aircraft. The idea...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Eastern Atlantic (Naval Forces) (22 Oct 1985)

Mr John Stanley: ...knows, a substantial amount of shipbuilding is now taking place at Swan Hunter and that a substantial amount of repair work is going to the Tyne repair yards. The answer to his question about Trident is that we could in no way protect this country against nuclear blackmail with destroyers and frigates.

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (2 Jul 1985)

Mr John Stanley: Since the beginning of 1985 the Government have received from Scotland on the general subject of Trident 23 letters, including one petition, and a number of postcards.