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).

29 COMMENTS

  1. 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…

  2. 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 !

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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?

  7. 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.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here