It has been widely reported that a majority of the public support the Government’s proposal to fully renew Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons programme, according to a poll for The Independent.

A smaller proportion, three out of 10 (29 per cent), support the plan floated by Jeremy Corbyn to keep the submarines but to send them to sea without warheads. A further 20 per cent oppose any form of Trident renewal, according to the survey of 2,000 people by ORB.

51 per cent of people back full renewal of Trident, while a total of 49 per cent prefer either non-nuclear submarines or reject any renewal.

Recently, it was found that more than half of Scots want Britain to retain a nuclear deterrent after Trident is decommissioned, according to a Lord Ashcroft poll.

The survey found that 51 per cent of people in Scotland want Trident replaced with an “equally powerful” nuclear missile system or a cheaper, more limited version.

In contrast, only 34 per cent want to “give up nuclear weapons completely”. More Scots (43 per cent) wanted the weapons system to continue being based at Faslane on the Clyde than said it should be moved south of the Border (39 per cent).

According to The Independent poll, men (59 per cent) are more likely to favour full renewal of Trident than women (43 per cent). Women are more receptive to Mr Corbyn’s alternative (37 per cent) than men (21 per cent). There is also a big age divide, with those aged 65 and over (66 per cent) twice as likely to back a full Trident upgrade than 18-24 year-olds (33 per cent).

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jason Mitchell

Too right we do and if if anyone wants to listen to that goat faced shite Corbyn they must be as daft as him.

Pete Herbert

He’s the biggest threat to this country!

David Hollingworth

It’s frightening that 3 in 10 backed Corbyns idiotic plan to replace the subs (most of the cost) and send them out unarmed (presumably they would threaten to pull faces If provoked..)
I know this was a poll for the independent but it’s still shocking that so many people are plainly that stupid…

Peter George

I think Corby was going to arm them with Party Poppers

Steve Harry

I think it is just that all the Corbynites read the independent

Andrew Clark

Corbyn left – wing dick


He certainly is!!!!

Daniel Adams

I saw a article in the guardian stating the majority were against uk nuclear weapons the other day. Of course they used a diferent wording of the question.

Connor Newton

Why should Britain give up her nuclear missiles when the rest of the world isn’t ready too either the threat is very real these days ! . Until it is safe to do so and other nuclear powers are ready to dispose of their nuclear weapons Britain needs to maintain its nuclear arsenal !

Sean Mccallum

160 billion ye let’s just sweep it away like a pair of dirty socks

Brian Cureton
Sean Mccallum

Seen that shocking smarmy fooks

Sean… £160bn where do you get that figure from?

Sean Mccallum

The work to house it maintenance ect, will never be fired

Brian Cureton

Sean Mccallum, can anyone really be that stupid???…

Sean you still haven’t said where you get your figure from when even the CND don’t think it’s anywhere near that. If you quote figures back them up.

And of course it won’t be fired that’s the point of the deterrent.

Brian Cureton

Martyn Torrontes Smith, these cranks keep putting the figure up every other day, they started at £50 billion, then it was £100 billion, then £150 billion, now this, I think by the end of the year they will be claiming it is a gazillion pounds?-).

Sean Mccallum

1.6 trillion even lol

Jim Fraser

It’s not an independent nuclear deterent and it never will be for a shabby little post-colonial NATO member with a desperate need to find a reason for their navy to feel important. Precision is the name of the game and if you spend the same money on enhancing the navy’s precision targeting of sea and land targets, enhance our airpower with a proper range of aircraft, and lighten the load of the infantry soldier to make him twice as effective then it will make us REALLY SCARY.

Hugh Mitchell

The cost works out as around a Mars Bar a week for every man, woman and child in the UK……….To be honest I could do with eating at least one less Mars bar a week


When you hear the word majority, you seem to automatically perceive that as an overwhelming majority. When you realise it is a 51% majority you realise it is much closer than you originally perceive.


I thought I read somewhere that Jeremy Corbyn said that money saved on not renewing Trident could be used on conventional military hardware, personnel etc. Imagine the carriers, destroyers, jets etc that could be available and actually used.

Don’t mean this post to be flame bait but it’s a thought.


And you believe that Jeremy Corbyn, if in power and he decided to scrap Trident, would actually spend money on upgrading or increasing our conventional military? No chuffing way. He’d divert it so he could buy votes.

He’s a self proclaimed pacifist. He’s publicly stated that he wouldn’t defend the UK and it’s people from any provocation. No I’d rather that the UK has a nuclear deterrent, especially in this uncertain world where all kinds of unfriendly countries are trying to get a nuclear weapon of their own.

Trevor Davey

It’s one of the only thing we have left which gives us any power at the world table. Loose it and we are nothing.

Geoffrey Roach

WE SURRENDER! The ultimate deterrent. Corbyn memo to all belligerent states that are armed to the teeth. Please don’t fire anything at us. We are peace loving and don’t like bad things. WE surrender and I am unanimous in that….I think?

John Elliott

The best thing his Masters in Moscow could wish for, would be us giving up our nuclear deterrent!!

Corbyn is an idiot of first class proportions …the sooner those mis – guided fools who voted him in realise this and get him out ,the safer this country will be .

David Flandry

There has been a belief stated that if Britain reduced its nuclear arsenal, other nuclear states would follow suit. Well, the British arsenal has fallen from over 500 nuclear weapons three decades ago to 386, then 192, then 184, then 160, now 120. Not a single nuclear state except the United States and Russia have cut nuclear arsenals, and that was for strategic and treaty reasons. All the others have either stayed constant or increased theirs. Pakistan now has more nukes than Britain, although they are mostly short-range tactical ones. And now even Russian is increasing its arsenal.