AS THE two-party consensus on Trident begins to break down, thanks to the anti-nuclear mandate of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, the debate is hotting up.

The latest contribution comes from an unexpected quarter: the Conservative chair of the defence select committee, Crispin Blunt MP.

Mr Blunt has revealed new figures which suggest that rather than Trident replacement costing £100 billion — the figure we at the CND use, calculated fairly conservatively from government information — it would actually cost in the region of £167bn.

Crispin Blunt is interesting politically. A former army officer, he is outspokenly against replacing Trident. As he points out: “The price required, both from the UK taxpayer and our conventional forces, is now too high to be rational or sensible.”

Of course we wouldn’t want it even if it was free of charge, but it is positive to hear a senior Conservative politician objectively assessing the situation rather than jumping on the “we must have it for status reasons” bandwagon. In fact, it would be positive if some of the pro-Trident senior Labour politicians would also adopt such a considered approach.

Of course this military anti-Trident position isn’t new or unique.

There are a number of senior military figures who have spoken out, once retired, against Trident. It was a great pleasure to read a letter in The Times a few years ago from generals and field marshals, stating that Trident was militarily useless and should be scrapped — and more recently Major-General Patrick Cordingley has outspokenly opposed Trident.

They all share the view that money should instead be spent on conventional weaponry, whereas most people would prefer increased social spending — on the NHS, for example. But what this underlines for me is that we can never make assumptions about people’s views on Trident, about whether those views can change, and the value of dialogue to bring about that change.

I have often heard people say that there is no point in speaking to their MP about Trident, because they are a Tory, or because they are right-wing Labour — and therefore they have unchangeable views. I would never agree that discussion isn’t worth it, and I very much welcome Corbyn’s commitment to dialogue on Trident and his pursuance of his persuasive ways within the Labour Party and its forthcoming policy review.

People do change their minds — otherwise how would we have a situation where former Tory defence secretary Michael Portillo is now completely opposed to replacing Trident?

In any case, not everyone has made up their mind on Trident and so the more discussion we have the better.

When I was at Labour Party conference last month, I was in a queue behind two delegates who were talking about Trident.

One of them said “I didn’t know what to think about Trident until I heard Jeremy Corbyn talking about it. Now I’m against it.” And her friend in the queue agreed.

There is nothing but good to come from an open debate and discussion on Trident — and that applies both inside the Labour Party while it has an open and democratic debate on its nuclear policy, and across society too.

The reality is that the issue is too serious to be left to uninformed MPs, or those who make a judgement about the future of Britain’s nuclear weapons on the basis of a knee-jerk cold war attitude, or an expensive and dangerous fantasy about Britain’s role in the world.

And of course the issue is too urgent to push to one side: a decision on whether or not to replace Trident will be made in Parliament next year.

So we have a two-fold task: first to help bring about an informed and democratic change in Labour’s policy on Trident so that it no longer backs Tory policy on this or offer a blank cheque for nuclear weapons; and second, as attitudes are changing, to visit or revisit every single MP, in person, to discuss Trident and explain why they should not vote to replace it.

If you are a Labour Party member — and let’s face it, many more people are — please ask your constituency party to invite a CND speaker to a meeting to debate Trident and pass a motion against the replacement of Trident.

Many CLPs are already doing this and we have a list of speaking engagements as long as your arm. This can only support and strengthen the official review process when it is announced. And it is fully in line with Corbyn’s anti-Trident mandate.

If you are not in the Labour Party, a similar event at your trade union branch would also be very useful in getting the issue discussed more widely across society. Email me at enquiries@cnduk.org to request a speaker.

With regard to the MPs, there is a great opportunity for parliamentary lobbying next week.

On Wednesday November 4, the CND is organising a lobby of MPs from 1-5pm. It would be great if you could join us: you can make an appointment to talk to your MP any time during the afternoon, or even call in during your lunch break if you work nearby.

It doesn’t have to take long. We have room W1 in Parliament available for a briefing if you need it before you see your MP, and then you can rejoin us to report back afterwards.

We’ve already confirmed a large number of meetings so more will help give an even bigger push.

You can contact your MP to arrange a meeting through cnduk.org and if you need any help please contact parliamentary@cnduk.org.
We are counting on you to support us with this work. We have a huge opportunity to make the break with Trident. Help us if you can.

Kate Hudson is general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.