PMQs Queries

Today's Prime Ministers Questions featured some important matters of course...banking and bonus culture, reform of the NHS...As is most often the case however, the motivation for questions and answers is party politics and tactics - trying to get your opponent on the back foot. Very serious, highly topical matters that should be raised often dont get a look in.

 No MP let alone Labour Leader Ed Miliband, asked about policy on Afghanistan despite the fact that overnight it was reported that a 'secret Nato report seen by the BBC suggests the Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly helped by the Pakistani security service (ISI).' (see full report and links to others here). This is a matter of life and death to our service personnel and Pakistan is supposed to be an ally. 

 Also no questions on the ongoing, unresolved economic crisis in Greece that could have widespread ramifications and where 'problems are as bad as ever.' (see here). Nothing on the prospect of famine in West Africa (here)...Ok, there is limited time and there are many serious issues that could be asked about - but there is a definite pattern to PMQs that severely narrows the topics chosen and the style and quality of debate.    

From a culture of war to a culture of peace

Bruce Kent, Vice-chair of CND, will speak at a public meeting on Tues 4th Oct at the Central Quaker Meeting House, Champion Square, BS2 9DB on the subject: 'From a Culture of War to a Culture of Peace'. He asks why our society is dominated by military values and thinking and whether this leads to greater security and happiness. Refreshments from 6.30; informal conversation with Bruce from 7.00; Bruce's presentation at 7.30 p.m. followed by questions and discussion.Admission free but retiring collection. Organised by Bristol Quakers.

Government promotion of arms trading

There is a very strong case for closing the UK Trade and Investment Defence and Security Organisation (UKTI DSO). The UK's active promotion of arms trading through the UKTI DSO should end because arms trading has a devastating impact on millions of people including many living under repressive and violent regimes (see BBC report below*). Such regimes can never be relied on and selling arms to them threatens the security of both the people in those countries and UK interests.

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12967374

Arms export deals: MPs criticise UK's stance - Ministers past and present have been criticised over the UK's export of weapons to regimes in Africa and the Middle East.

The cross-party Committees on Arms Exports Controls accused ministers of "misjudging" the risk that the weapons might be used for internal repression. Countries recently sold UK arms include Libya, Egypt and Bahrain.

But the government, which has revoked arms licences to several countries, said its safeguards were "robust".

As recently as last year, the UK approved arms exports to regimes that have used force to confront popular uprisings.

Ammunition and tear gas were sold to Libya, with sniper rifles, sub-machine guns and CS grenades exported to Bahrain. Parts for armoured vehicles and weapons also went to Egypt.

The cross-party group of MPs noted that since January the government had "been vigorously backpedalling", revoking a total of 160 arms export licences. In February, dozens of licences for the export of arms to Bahrain were revoked after a Foreign Office review amid fears over the suppression of protests there....

(click the link* for more details)

See: http://www.caat.org.uk/

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12967374

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/05-04-2011-arms-exports-report.html

Cameron 'committed to full Trident replacement'

There isn't all-party support for retaining the UK nuclear deterrent, though the BBC asserts that there is. The Green Party eg through Caroline Lucas MP, is very clearly and strongly opposed and regards both the threatened and actual use of any weapon of mass destruction as immoral and illegal - and there are other MPs that support this view. Ludicrously our PM David Cameron uses phrases like 'keep our guard up' and 'insurance policy' about nuclear weapons!

It is, sadly, right to say though that few politicians are now arguing a fundamental case against nuclear weapons. I watched the 1959 film On the Beach about a post-apocalyptic world again recently. Its not a cheery number - with characters played by Gregory Peck, Ava Gardiner, Anthony Perkins, Fred Astaire and others facing the end of their lives and the end of human beings as fatal radiation levels spread across the globe - but for me its a classic film that makes some very telling points.

I'm 100% with Fred Astaire's character when he says 'The war started when people accepted the idiotic principle that peace could be maintained by arranging to defend themselves with weapons they could not possibly use without committing suicide.' (see video clip). Our PM David Cameron continues, with the support of the Labour and Lib Dem leadership, to support this idiotic principle.

"In terms of the future, all I can say... is that I am in favour of a full replacement for Trident, for continuous at-sea deterrent, and to make sure we keep our guard up.

"That is Conservative policy. It will remain Conservative policy as long as I am the leader of this party."'

All-party support

Labour MP John Woodcock, whose Barrow-in-Furness constituency builds the Trident submarines, also asked Mr Cameron for reassurance that he would not go back on his word.

Mr Cameron said: "I profoundly believe we should maintain our independent nuclear deterrent. I have looked at all of the alternatives over the years and I am completely convinced that you need a submarine based alternative - a full replacement for Trident in order to guarantee the ultimate insurance policy for this country."

BBC News - David Cameron 'committed to full Trident replacement'

£1 billion...er...'stealthy' nuclear submarine...

Apparently we are in the process of building two more of these
'£1 billion',
'stealthy'
nuclear submarines - but with three of them running around [or should that be running aground] instead of one are we three times as likely to experience just how stealthy they really are? Just how justified is our high defence spending?

BBC News - Grounded nuclear sub dragged free

A nuclear-powered submarine which ran aground in shallow waters off the Isle of Skye has been towed free, the Royal Navy has said.
A tug had been carefully pushing along one side of HMS Astute, which got into difficulty a few miles from the Skye road bridge.
Described as the stealthiest ever built in the UK, the £1bn boat was out on sea trials and was not armed....

Aircraft carriers with...er...no aircraft: alternative use proposed

This use of aircraft carriers without any...er...aircraft has apparently been put forward by the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition Govt - obviously the 'greenest government ever' - in order to counter one of our real security threats, climate change. Perhaps it will be followed by flowers in guns instead of bullets, bombers turning into butterflies above our nation.... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/normantebbit/100059722/defence-review-aircraft-carriers-without-aircraft-are-like-a-pub-without-beer/

Choices and cuts

What are the merits of taxation? Are we about to learn of its merits when we hear about the huge cuts in public spending affecting many vital public services? There are choices but to listen to the Conservative-Lib Dem Coalition Government one would think not. There's the balance between raising more in taxation vs cutting spending. There's the speed and scale of spending cuts (and tax rises). There are the areas or people to tax more and areas to cut spending on. Already I believe a serious error has been made by not cutting defence spending more, when they are so bad at controlling their costs and getting value for money. And why those child benefit changes that dont take account of the whole of a household's income? Universality for child benefit has very clear advantages. I heard on the local news about Bristol City Council's plans to cut the amount spent on dealing with homelessness by hundreds of thousands - wrong because a roof over your head is a basic need and also counterproductive in my view because this spending helps people to become settled, working, productive, tax paying people who might otherwise be a big cost society in many ways.

Cut Trident, save £97 billion, protect public services

Received the email copied below from Greenpeace today. I agree entirely with them that we should cut out the Trident nuclear weapons replacement and save £97 billion - and help protect essential public services from cuts. Whilst on the topic of military spending we've spent £8-£9 billion on the war in Afghanistan over the last 8yrs or so too - lets bring our troops home, save our soldiers lives and avoid spending a further £8-£9 billion in the next 8yrs too.
___________________________________________
Hot on the heels of our 'In the Firing Line' investigation, which showed that Trident replacement will cost UK taxpayers a shocking £97 billion, we’re busy campaigning to stop the UK building new nuclear weapons.

In December we projected a 100 foot high message to the Chancellor onto Big Ben – an image of a Trident missile with the caption: 'Darling...Cut the crap'.

But yesterday Alistair Darling missed a golden opportunity in the pre-election budget. He could have cancelled Trident, and used the money to help fund new green jobs, protect frontline services and reduce the nation's debts.

Instead, he preferred to effectively cut public sector pay and services by reducing government departmental spending by £11bn.

With an election in the offing, now is the time to tell politicians that we want our hard-earned taxes spent on things we actually need, not wasted on doomsday machines which many former generals admit have no military value.

So we've made it easy for you to write to all your parliamentary candidates in one go, to ask them if they are happy to waste £97bn on a weapon which is irrelevant to the real threats we face.

For inspiration, visit our video wall to get ideas about how we could better spend this enormous sum of money. For just £2bn, for example, we could reduce class sizes in UK schools down to an average of 20 by 2020. We could spend it on tackling climate change and fuel poverty.
On the wall you can post your own views about how this huge amount of cash could be better spent, and you can also watch our Cut Trident animation (complete with soundtrack by Massive Attack) or spread the word by sharing it with your friends.

With President Obama committing to reduce nuclear weapons, and the US and Russia close to agreeing a new arms control treaty, the possibility of a nuclear-free world is no longer pie-in-the-sky. With your help, we want to put the phrase 'Cut Trident' on everyone's lips in the run up to this election, and take a big step towards making it a reality.

Thanks so much for your support,

Defence and security

My response to CND, who are seeking the views of general election candidates...I'm an anti-nuclear campaigner, both nuclear weapons and nuclear power, of over 25 yrs standing. I would certainly vote against the replacement of Trident and would vote for a Nuclear Weapons Convention aimed at banning all nuclear weapons internationally.

As a Green MP I would work to:

*Ensure that the British military is only used in self defence, or as a last resort, within an international UN-led policing force;

*Improve the military to promote human security, by focusing only on defence not aggression and specialising in crisis prevention, emergency relief and conflict resolution;

*Seek binding global agreements against all weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear weapons;

*End all export subsidies and increase controls on UK arms sales, especially to goverments who violate human rights.