Trident doubts over Hammond

CONCERNS have been raised that the promotion of Phillip Hammond to the position of Defence Secretary could lead to a rethink on replacing Trident.

The nuclear deterrent, currently based in the Faslane submarine base on the Clyde, supports an estimated 11,000 jobs in Scotland.

There has been a debate within the coalition over whether it is too expensive to replace, with a lifetime cost of £100 billion.

The Lib Dems have made it clear they oppose the replacement and have an opt-out in the coalition agreement to abstain on the issue.

There have been concerns among right-wing Conservative back-benchers that the Treasury and Chancellor George Osborne might also be willing to sacrifice a submarine-based nuclear deterrent for something cheaper.

But former defence secretary Liam Fox, who was forced to resign last week over questions about his relationship with a defence contractor, had let it be known he would resign as a point of principle if the Trident replacement was abandoned.

But defence experts point out that Dr Fox’s replacement, Mr Hammond, the former transport secretary, has never voted in favour of replacing Trident and has abstained on all occasions.

He also arrives with a reputation as a minister more interested in finding savings.

Guy Anderson, chief analyst at IHS Jane’s, the leading defence analysts, said: “The future of the UK nuclear deterrent is now less certain. Hammond is also less likely than his predecessor to fight the corner for the defence industry, which is looking to emerging markets to secure its future.”

One Conservative back-bencher privately told The Scotsman: “This is an issue we have to be constantly vigilant on.”

The issue has been raised because of an upcoming government white paper on defence technology, expected to reveal detail on which technologies the government wants to keep onshore, instead of buying “off-the-shelf” or from overseas.