Jim Murphy warns that independence could cost ‘thousands’ of defence jobs
Jim Murphy: Separation could cost thousands of shipyard jobs. Picture: TSPL
SCOTTISH Labour warned today that there are “significant unanswered questions” about the impact of independence on defence.
Jim Murphy, the Shadow Defence Secretary, said separation could cost “thousands” of jobs in Scotland’s shipyards as a result of lost contract.
Murphy said: “The Clyde is a working river. It has to stay open for business for generations to come, but separation would wipe it out because we’d lose the biggest order book going.”
Mr Murphy was speaking following comments made in a Scottish Sunday newspaper by ex-Royal Navy head Admiral Lord West.
The former First Sea Lord told the Sunday Mail: “If Scotland became completely independent, there is no way that what would be left of the UK would build its warships in another country.
“The Clyde yards would be entirely reliant on foreign orders from countries who don’t have their own shipbuilding industries.
“If I was on the board of BAE, I would be questioning whether there should be more investment there until we know if Scotland is going to become a separate country”.
Mr Murphy said: “Defence is a crucial industry in Scotland and we are strongest when we work together. For decades we have benefited from contracts to build Royal Navy ships. It’s the size of the Navy order book that sustains our yards.
“In good times and in bad, thousands of Scots workers including my own dad have worked on those famous ships. The aircraft carriers being built on the Clyde and Rosyth right now are the biggest in our history and almost three times the length of a football pitch.
“It’s crystal clear that if we leave Britain then we leave the Royal Navy. If we lose the Navy we lose the work in the yards. That would cost thousands of skilled jobs and many more in small companies in the supply chain.
“I don’t want Scotland to be a foreign country to the rest of the UK and the Royal Navy hasn’t built a warship in a foreign country in living memory.
“It’s time for the Nationalists to come clean. Pretending this isn’t a real and pressing risk is deeply irresponsible and treating people like fools. Instead of their games and gimmicks on a multiple question referendum they need to provide answers on how many of the jobs will be lost”.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 237 comments to this article
Page 1 of 16
andyglasgow
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 10:14 AMLabour Naesayer in 'Independance could cause 'X' shocker. Where 'X' is some unknowable potential negative. I am sick to death of Tory and Labour idiots like this spouting negative nonesense. There are so many things we do know tht we could actually debate. No wonder morons like this are being routed from their offices up and down the country. Take your pinch faced negativity somewhere else Jimmy.
Graeme M
Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at 06:38 AMMurphy, This bloke is just another woe-betide wallah, I said all along they will be coming out of the woodwork, mostly to gain prominence for themsleves, they don't fool anybody. If and when Scotland is free to do whatever, things will all come to pass to get sorted out and what a joy that will be for sure. It will all work itself out in time to come, despite the ner do wells!..Ciamar a that thu!...(Cheers)...
Jolly
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 08:20 PMThe West Awake Why was the polish yard dodgy? Is this your personal view??
ELDee
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 08:15 PM#230, Hi I have followed this quite a bit too; Scotland would need its own military based on its requirements. It would be highly unlikely that an Independent Scottish Defence Force would have the same aims as the current UK forces. However it would still have its own aims based on any foreign policy and economic requirments, but it would also have a responsibility to its neighbours, whether they be in NATO or Partership for Peace or not. For example many quote the Danish or Norwegian model for forces; Scotland's is likely to be similar, but not the same. For example Denmark has no submarines or long range maritime reconnaisance aircraft, but Norway has; what would Scotland require? Who knows, but either way any Forces would need to be effective, deployable and not just 'playing at it' for the sake of looking good.
puca
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 07:51 PMThere is a question that needs to be answered, if or when seperation happens what hsppens to all the jobs that are a direct result of being apart of the uk, ie civil service, military personal, companies that employ people for uk contracts, uk call centers etc. I would like to see some plans which has some details of how these jobs are safe guarded or redeploy or something that shows that these concerns are being addressed.
Charles P
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 07:40 PMForgive me for being personal here, but The Rev I. M. Kelly gives me the boke! I can only see him sitting in a chair, like Dear Ricky Fulton, sighing and bemoaning his lot in that unctuous, wheedling, whining voice, but totally devoid of humour, pronouncing like he is the 'second coming!' Not one word about shipbuilding on the East Coast, but plenty to say about his own back yard and power base on the Clyde. If what's going on in Glasgow Council is any pointer, his coat's on a shoogly nail anyhow. Can't bear to look at the man, a me, me me, Politician.
AuldLochinvar
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 07:13 PMPerhaps Scotland needs to defend ourselves most from the English, but I note that the North of England maybe doesn't get so great a deal from the South. It occurs to me that Scotland is being despoiled by wind farms, which kill not only big birds, but also the beautiful scenery which is the best reason for not living in lush places like Hampshire. On the other hand, Scotland probably still has enough scientific acumen to adopt the French approach to nuclear energy, or better still (please look it up on the web) the Integral Fast (breeder) Reactor, which had as one of its senior designers Dr. Charles Till, a Canadian. Why a breeder reactor? Because it consumes ALL of its long lived waste, and gets up to 200 times as much energy per ton of uranium as PWR designs do. Oh yes, and it doesn't melt down.
Il Penseroso
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 05:35 PMThe interesting points in the debate appear to revolve round the military contest between Anagach and amicus alba! The latter seems to me to be anything but a"Friend of Scotland"! Amicus states he has taken the Queen's Shilling for some time now and an expert in military hard ware. His military prognosis for Scotland, in my book, is totally irrelevant to Scotland's future needs. A country needs a military presence to protect its national boundaries from aggressors.Can I ask him, who is going to invade Scotland? Who in this world is Scotland going to invade? I see no reason to embark on a huge delusional force able to sustain the aims of our southern ( still imperialist) neighbours.I see no need to be part of any huge international force. Nato is such a force and is clearly impotent. I doubt if even the USA could compete with Russia or China in a conventional war. The alternative is Armageddon and an obliterated World. So why not use the resources in our shipbuilding capabilities and compete with other countries and build ships for other reasons than WAR. The expertise and training of "amicus alba" can be hired in other parts of disfunctional countries. In Scotland he is supernumerary.
Huntly Loon
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 05:19 PMJim Murphy equates defence jobs with shipbuilding jobs. These are not the same. Our defence is based on the Army, Navy and Airforce. That is the only consideration that needs to be made when gauging the sufficiency of our defence. Shipbuilders are merely suppliers, like tough boots and kitbags. Jim Murphy is not caring about defence. He is interested only in his perceived electoral base in west central Scotland. If the aircraft carriers were being built in Shetland, we would not have heard a peep from Mr Murphy.
The West Awake
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 04:46 PM227 Good post, if Scotland adopted the military spend profile of say Denmark we could save billions, even more if we copied Eire. I don't hear anyone shouting about how poorly defended Denmark is, or even Eire for that matter. Scotland would not have the military priorities of the UK and consequently not the responsibilities or associated costs. In my view the UK shouldn't have the UK's military priorities either but that's another story...
Anagach
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 03:54 PM226 amicus alba My point being, to be civil, is Defence will be cost prohibitive to Scotland. The SNP is not being honest about this or has no cogent well thought out plan for on any SDF. It will need to start from scratch; recruitment, training, equipping; never mind strategic defence policies, commitments to international orgs or what they would commit in terms of troops to under NATO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your point is valid on the assumption that Scotland tries to punch up to UK levels of defense activity, but Scotland has neither the GDP nor the political desire to project military force internationaly. You claim to be aware of the militaries of Denmark, Norway, Finland and the like, and it is that size and style of military that Scotland would look to maintain, what do you see as the problem ?, Scotland currently sends some £4bn as taxes to the MOD and get back just over half. Things can harfly be worse if we retain all of it to spend on out own forces.
amicus alba
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 02:18 PM215. Anagach; "and would you say the SA80 was value for money, reliable and rugged compared with the others?". ================================================== Value for money? No. It's certainly it's no AK which can be replicated easily and sold to third world countries at a cheap price. So there's ROI (if that was ever an aim). -----------------------------Reliable? Granted the first A1 had major teething probs in the late eighties when it was issued and again in the first Gulf war (different environment). Since then - yes it has certainly been ruggedized. All new weapon systems have problems. Even the M16 has major teething problems. It's good in jungle environments, good in urban environments, even good for parachuting with. Different tools for different environments. ================================================== Military equipment will never be cheap and will always go through modifications as scientist and engineers are not soldiers and cannot replicate the vast ammount of conditions and testing. ==================================================My point being, to be civil, is Defence will be cost prohibitive to Scotland. The SNP is not being honest about this or has no cogent well thought out plan for on any SDF. It will need to start from scratch; recruitment, training, equipping; never mind strategic defence policies, commitments to international orgs or what they would commit in terms of troops to under NATO.
runaway
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 02:11 PMTypical Labour MP..When he takes the time out to talk, in Labour fashion, he downs Scotland as his Westminster lords tell him to do.....Absolutely no shame.....Did he and Labour give a toss about the Clyde when they were in power....Oh a deafening silence....
Anagach
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 02:04 PM219 davidjames It is naive to expect that an independent UK would give any breaks to Scotland in terms of defence activity. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Absolutely true, it get none now and its part of the Union.
Anagach
Monday, February 13, 2012 at 02:03 PM217 Danielrober2 Just publish a separation plan with data, information, methodology and conclusions according to EU norm. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Can you link to the EU norm for seperation ?. I do not believe that any such thing exists and that you have made it up. But I could be wrong, so please point to the documents from the EU defining a 'seperation plan'.
Page 1 of 16
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.