Faslane Investment

[pointedstarman]

So the Government has announced £500m investment in Faslane securing 6000+ jobs.

As far as I can tell they've got no undertaking from the SNP that they won't try to effectively shut the place down if (or when given they seem intent on hold referendums until they get the answer they want) Scotland goes independent.

Surely the money would be more safely invested in one of the more 'stable' bases to help make them capable in the future of taking the Trident replacement?

[pointedstarman]

I would have thought publicly asking for a written and binding undertaking regarding the future of the base prior to investing would make them squirm. If they refuse they are responsible to the possible loss of Scottish jobs. Accept and at least we have some level of security should they win an independence vote?

As it stands I just get the feeling we're ping £500m away on a vanity project.

[pointedstarman]

Scuffers said:

pointedstarman said:

As it stands I just get the feeling we're ping £500m away on a vanity project.

Just for clarity...

are you saying you don;t support the use of Faslane for the UK sub fleet or are you being specifically anti-trident?

The reason I am asking is that the plan is to make Faslane able to support the other non-ballistic missile subs that are currently homes elsewhere.

I'm anti investing money in a facility with what is, at best, a shaky political future. I've no problem with a next gen nuclear deterrent in principle; whether a direct Trident replacement is the best solution could be a topic for another thread.

[pointedstarman]

davepoth said:

pointedstarman said:

I'm anti investing money in a facility with what is, at best, a shaky political future. I've no problem with a next gen nuclear deterrent in principle; whether a direct Trident replacement is the best solution could be a topic for another thread.

I would be very surpised if our nuclear deterrent moved from Faslane - the base could remain sovereign UK territory quite easily, in the same way that We have bits of Cyprus, or the US has Guantanamo, or even how Russia had a bit of the Crimea (until it decided it wanted all of it), it's quite a well worn path in international diplomacy.

Whilst in many ways I agree I think it'd be sensible to get some sort of agreement in place before bunging half a billion at the place.