Skip to main content

Trident - and deterrence

Whereas I will be opposing the government's plans on this later today I thought I should put on record my views relating to this issue.

The underlying question is whether the UK should be in possession of nuclear weapons. That is weapons that are based upon the use of fission or fusion generated explosives. It is clear that we have moved on from the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction. However, it is not the case that we live in a safer world than during the cold war.

It is true that some of the hazards internationally have been developed by the actions of the UK and US governments in doing things which are destined to create nothing much more than enduring resentment. That does not mean, however, that all would have been sweetness and light had the UK not acted as it has.

The question, therefore, is whether there is a need for any weaponry based upon the more energetic nuclear systems rather than chemical explosives (not chemical weapons, however). I do think this is something that the UK should be looking at as a strategic option. The delivery systems, however, could be a mixture of plane and cruise or submarine. I do believe that there could be a role for a submarine based missile delivery system.

In essence the question that has to be asked is where there is a rogue state do we need to be able to use weaponry that does not involve targeting the population as a whole. I think the answer to this is yes. What can develop is a form of gangster dominated state that does not really care that much about its population, but does care about personal security for the leading members of the society. That is where these options need to be looked at.


Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…