Results 1–20 of 38 for warheads "next parliament"

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (21 Jul 2014)

Philip Dunne: ...Defence and Security Review determined that a replacement warhead would not be required until at least the late 2030s, meaning a decision to replace the existing warhead will not be required until the next Parliament. In the meantime, we are maintaining the capability at the Atomic Weapons Establishment to design a replacement warhead should that be required. Current forecasts indicate...

Written Answers — Defence: Trident (28 Jan 2014)

Philip Dunne: The UK is not producing replacement Trident warheads and costing for a future warhead is subject to consideration in the next Parliament.

Defence: Trident Review — Question (9 Jul 2013)

Lord Lea of Crondall: ...the Vanguard submarines. Will it also consider whether, relatively soon in a submarine’s lifetime, its missiles will need a new warhead? The Government plan to consider that question in the next Parliament, deferring the timetable for consideration in this Parliament given in the 2006 White Paper. Secondly, is it possible to develop a new warhead without testing it and therefore...

Written Answers — Defence: Trident (7 Sep 2012)

Philip Hammond: ...and Security Review determined that a replacement warhead would not be required until the 2030s. Therefore the decision to refurbish or replace the existing warhead will not be required until the next Parliament.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (13 Jul 2012)

Nick Harvey: ...for as long as necessary, and ensuring that the capability to design and manufacture a replacement warhead, should that be necessary, is maintained. The decision to refurbish or replace the existing warhead will be made in the next Parliament. Studies informing such a decision are expected to amount to some £12 million per annum in 2012-13 and 2013-14 and £16 million in 2014-15....

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (19 Dec 2011)

Peter Luff: We expect to spend £3.9 billion on the successor submarine programme by the maingate decision-point in 2016. We have deferred the decision on the future warhead until the next Parliament. We are spending around £900 million a year at AWE—the Atomic Weapons Establishment—on capital investment and running costs to ensure that we can sustain the capabilities to maintain the...

Trident (7 Dec 2011)

Peter Luff: ...us the capability that we need to design and produce a new warhead if and when required, but that is not the purpose of the expenditure. We will take the appropriate decisions at the right time, and Members will recall the commitment in the SDSR not to take any decisions on a new warhead until the next Parliament. We expect a replacement warhead to meet the White Paper estimate of between...

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (21 Mar 2011)

Peter Luff: ...the recent Trident Value for Money review, surveys have shown that our current warheads can be supported until the late 2030s and no decision will be required on its potential replacement until the next Parliament.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (16 Feb 2011)

Liam Fox: ...on 19 October 2010, Official Report, columns 797-826, the strategic defence and security review announced the deferral of the decision to replace or refurbish the UK nuclear warhead until the next Parliament.

Written Answers — Defence: Trident (15 Nov 2010)

Liam Fox: ...announced in the strategic defence and security review that a replacement warhead is not required until at least the late 2030s, with a decision on replacing the existing warhead deferred until the next parliament. The Atomic Weapons Establishment is, therefore, undertaking the required stockpile certification work to support the warhead arsenal until the late 2030s.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (3 Mar 2010)

Bob Ainsworth: ...forms part of studies being undertaken by Atomic Weapon Establishment under the Nuclear Warhead Capability Sustainment Programme. This is required to inform decisions, likely to be necessary in the next Parliament, on whether and how we may need to refurbish or replace our current warhead. Expenditure amounted to some £7.3 million in 2008-09 and is forecast to be some £16.5...

Written Answers — Defence: AWE Aldermaston (28 Jan 2010)

Quentin Davies: ...' (Cm 6994) makes clear, the current warhead design is likely to last into the 2020s. Decisions on how and whether we may need to refurbish or replace this warhead are likely to be necessary in the next Parliament.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (11 Nov 2009)

Jeremy Corbyn: ...replacement, the vote that took place in the House on replacement of the submarine system, the initial gate decision that has to be taken and the final decisions, which I assume will be taken in the next Parliament. I hope that, as part of our contribution towards the NPT review conference next May, we shall do a number of things. One is to say that we are not proceeding with the...

Written Answers — Defence: Atomic Weapons Establishment: Expenditure (1 Jun 2009)

John Hutton: ...5-11, to "£2-3 billion for the possible future refurbishment or replacement of the warhead". The decision on whether to refurbish or replace the warhead has yet to be made and will likely be necessary in the next Parliament. This cost is not reflected in any of the figures quoted in the question. In service costs of the current Trident programme were provided in a response to the...

Oral Answers to Questions — Defence: Trident (30 Mar 2009)

John Hutton: ...of £2 billion to £3 billion at 2006-07 prices. We have not yet made a decision to develop a new UK nuclear warhead. However, work is being undertaken to inform decisions, likely to be taken in the next Parliament, on whether and how we might need to refurbish or replace our current warhead.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (23 Mar 2009)

John Hutton: ...research is currently being undertaken, some in collaboration with the US, on how we may need to refurbish or replace our current warheads to help inform decisions, likely to be made in the next parliament. I am withholding the detail of this collaboration in the interests of national security.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons: Research (10 Mar 2009)

John Hutton: ...options that might be available. This work, some of which is being undertaken with the United States under the 1958 Mutual Defence Agreement, will inform decisions likely to be necessary in the next Parliament on the need to refurbish or replace the current warhead. The funding for this work is met by the UK Defence budget.

Written Answers — Defence: Ballistic Missile Defence (4 Mar 2009)

John Hutton: ...to support the examination of the optimum life of the UK's existing nuclear warhead and the range of replacement options that might be available to inform decisions, likely to be necessary in the next Parliament, on whether and how we may need to refurbish or replace the existing warhead. I am withholding details of the precise nature of this work in the interests of national security.

Written Answers — Defence: Nuclear Weapons (12 Feb 2009)

Quentin Davies: ...and reliability of the Trident stockpile through the remainder of its service life. There is currently no programme to develop a new UK warhead, although decisions are likely to be necessary in the next Parliament. Whilst not specifically designed for the purpose, the Orion laser could have utility in any research employing laser physics in support of any possible future warhead design.

Written Answers — Defence: Trident (18 Dec 2008)

Quentin Davies: There is no programme to develop a new UK nuclear warhead. There is, however, work being undertaken to inform decisions, likely to be taken in the next Parliament, on whether and, if so, how we might need to refurbish or replace our current warhead. There are no plans to introduce private finance initiatives to fund this work.


1 2 > >>

Create an alert

Did you find what you were looking for?

Advanced search

Find this exact word or phrase

You can also do this from the main search box by putting exact words in quotes: like "cycling" or "hutton report"

By default, we show words related to your search term, like “cycle” and “cycles” in a search for cycling. Putting the word in quotes, like "cycling", will stop this.

Excluding these words

You can also do this from the main search box by putting a minus sign before words you don’t want: like hunting -fox

We also support a bunch of boolean search modifiers, like AND and NEAR, for precise searching.

Date range

to

You can give a start date, an end date, or both to restrict results to a particular date range. A missing end date implies the current date, and a missing start date implies the oldest date we have in the system. Dates can be entered in any format you wish, e.g. 3rd March 2007 or 17/10/1989

Person

Enter a name here to restrict results to contributions only by that person.

Section

Restrict results to a particular parliament or assembly that we cover (e.g. the Scottish Parliament), or a particular type of data within an institution, such as Commons Written Answers.

Column

If you know the actual Hansard column number of the information you are interested in (perhaps you’re looking up a paper reference), you can restrict results to that; you can also use column:123 in the main search box.