What he said:
"If the Prime Minister's Cabinet has agreed this morning—as I believe it intends to—to launch its debate throughout the United Kingdom on the future of the Trident missile system, I welcome that debate. A debate should take place. It is essential to have a debate and to discuss all the options that should be available. As I have said before in the chamber, it would be wrong at the start of that debate to rule out absolutely a replacement for Britain's nuclear deterrent, given the international circumstances in which we operate. However, people who believe that we may need to renew the deterrent should also have an open mind at the start of the debate about the possibilities that could be on offer. A debate should be welcomed."
[Source: FMQs yesterday]
What he meant:
"Look, I can't say that I support the renewal of Trident, because that would upset too many of my backbenchers, not to mention potential labour voters next May. Nor can I say that I oppose the renewal of Trident, because Tony and Gordon would shout at me; and, as the renewal of Trident is going ahead anyway, I would look even weaker than usual as there is nothing I can do to stop it. That's why I have to spout this rubbish about welcoming a debate, even though everyone knows that Tony and Gordon have already made up their minds.
What do I really think? For so long, I've been saying what I'm supposed to say, that I can't remember what I really believe. But, honestly, I welcome a debate..."
1 comment:
why are these screwball politicians even considering replacing Trident? How much will it cost, who knows, when do they intend to use this weapon? exactly, we are supposed to be in NATO, why not just pay the Americans an insurance policy and be done with it, this country is now a third rate power, get over it.
Post a Comment