In a recent debate within the Scottish Parliament, members from both the Conservative Party and the Scottish National Party (SNP) have mistakenly reported employment numbers related to the Trident programme at Her Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde, which includes Faslane and Coulport.

This article aims to clarify these misstatements and present the factual employment figures.

Stephen Kerr, a Conservative MSP, states base’s employment significance with a broad stroke, “Many of the member’s constituents are probably employees who work at Faslane; indeed, the livelihoods of probably tens of thousands of people depend on it. That is the other side of the coin, and it deserves to be displayed as well as the side that the member is talking about.”

This claim inflated the actual figures significantly, painting a somewhat exaggerated economic dependency.

On the other side, SNP’s Marie McNair offered a considerably lower figure, “I thank the member for his intervention. I am not quite sure what the figure is, but I think that it is only 500.”

McNair’s statement, in contrast to the above, is far too low and it fails to account for the broader scope of employment..

The reality of employment figures at Faslane and Coulport is complex and substantial. Official data from the Ministry of Defence clarifies that the number of civilian jobs directly linked to the Trident programme is 520. However, these are positions strictly involved with the missile system, not the total number of jobs at the base relating to the entire programme, which of course includes the Vanguard class submarines.

Faslane, recognised as the second-largest single-site employer in Scotland, plays host to the United Kingdom’s four Vanguard-class submarines, which carry Trident II D-5 ballistic missiles. The base is integral to the Royal Navy’s operations and, by extension, to the Scottish economy.

Looking beyond the direct Trident-related roles, the broader employment impact of Faslane is impressive. The EKOS report, commissioned by Scottish Enterprise Dunbartonshire, points to nearly 11,000 jobs that are directly and indirectly supported by the base. This includes 6,500 military and civilian personnel on-site, with a further 4,000 jobs created through the supply chain and contributions to the local economy.

Additionally, new figures unearthed by Deidre Brock, SNP MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, through parliamentary written questions, show that over 6,000 individuals are directly employed at Faslane and Coulport, vastly exceeding the 500 jobs mentioned by McNair and far fewer than the figure given by Kerr.

James Heappey MP, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Ministry of Defence, provided a detailed breakdown in response to Brock’s questions, highlighting that, as of early 2021, 3,624 uniformed Royal Navy personnel were stationed at the Argyll and Bute sites, with 1,393 (38.4%) paying Scottish tax. Civilian employees not contracted out totalled 1,015 at Faslane and 475 at Coulport, with 91% and 89%, respectively, being Scottish taxpayers.

These figures reflect the considerable number of Scottish taxpayers employed at the base and contradict Kerr’s “tens of thousands” assertion while providing a more comprehensive picture than McNair’s singular focus on Trident-related employment.

Both the Conservative and SNP misstatements serve as a reminder of the importance of precise and informed debate.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

68 COMMENTS

  1. Does 11,000 count as ‘tens of thousands’? It’s certainly more than one tens of thousands, in which case, according to the EKOS report, the Conservative MP was correct, if misleading.

    • Thank you for your engagement with the article.

      The phrase “tens of thousands” typically implies at least 20,000, as it is the plural form and commonly understood to mean multiple tens of thousands. Therefore, while the figure of approximately 11,000 jobs at HM Naval Base Clyde is substantial and indeed exceeds 10,000, it does not meet the threshold of “tens of thousands” as would be generally interpreted in everyday language.

      The EKOS report indicates that the number of jobs directly and indirectly supported by the base is just under 11,000. This figure is a combination of direct employment on the base, including both military and civilian personnel, as well as the indirect employment generated in the surrounding community and through the base’s supply chain.

      It is indeed more than one “ten thousand,” but not by an amount that would accurately round up to “tens of thousands.”

      While the intention may not have been to mislead, precision is paramount.

      • Hi George in this case I actually think that the conservative mp was within the bounds of accurate…for a couple of reasons.

        1) Livelihood does not mean employed it’s definition is “means of supporting one’s existence” so the livelihood of a child is depend on the parents jobs…so in effect every job supported by the site there will be a family dependent for their livelihoods on that job..the average family in the UK is 2.4 so the number of people who’s livelihoods are dependent on each job would be 2.4.

        2) the service industry in the surrounding area is dependent on the primary employer..so all those high street jobs, service industry jobs, pubs, clubs, restaurants, etc are all dependent on the 10000 jobs created by the primary employer…this is amplified by a who family being dependent for each of their livelihoods on those service jobs….

        this means a primary employer of 10,000 people supports the livelihoods of many more than 10,000 households each with 2.4 people in it.

        This is from someone who’s not a lover of the Conservative Party, but I do believe in fairs fair…

    • If you look at it from another angle it says “Ten’s of thousands of people depend on it ” This could be interpreted as spouses and children of those actual directly employed. I’m probably wrong though. 🤔

    • That’s a rather reductive statement. Were you aware that it’s not “just” 4,000 submariners at HMNB Clyde. Look at what units call Faslane “home”: Northern Diving Group; Mine Countermeasures Vessels, FPGRM, RFA, FOST to mention just a few…

    • That figure of 3,624 is for the whole base. Not just boat crews. The whole SSN and SSBN fleet is at Faslane. RM 43 Commando fleet protection group, Sandown class mine warefare vessles, Faslane patrol boat Squadron, Northern diving group and some RFA vessels. It needs a big chunk of people working across many different trades and branches to support the whole operation out of Faslane. Every single person has a very important role to play that ultimately leads to Nuclear boats safely deploying to sea and supporting ongoing operations.

    • In short, work! I’m assuming you have never been in a naval base before?
      Faslane is now the sole SM operating base for the RN, as well as conducting all SM basic trg.
      Roughly speaking a broad breakdown of numbers:

      6 X SSBN crews – 900
      5 X SSN crews – 650
      Spare crew – 250+
      SM basic trg – 100+
      Royals – 300-500
      FOSNI staff 100+
      Maintenance and supply -500+

      I’m sure I’ve missed of a few more depts that contribute to the overall numbers such as medical/Comms staff etc, but I’m sure you get the picture now!

      • 135 SSBN crew ×6 = ?
        4 boats, 1 of which is being made ready
        The other three are threadders. Please don’t answer.

        Spare crew? Please don’t answer.

        Then the SSNs crews vs the SSBN crew numbers. Please don’t answer.

        No one mentioned Royals. Please don’t answer.

        Sorry, a lot of people not doing very much, however, they pay into the Scottish economy.

        Now people, talk to me about manning the T31 batch 2s.

        • There are actually 7 SSBN crews, one is on the SM in refit (Victorious), the other three boats have two crews each!
          SSNs have a smaller crew then a SSBN.
          The Royals are part of the Navy, always have been, Commandant General RM reports to RN Fleet Commander, like it or not.
          I think you will find that a lot of people are actually doing a lot more than paying into the Scottish economy.
          Please don’t bother replying, unless you have something worthwhile to add!

          • Er. It’s called national security, thxs for recognition of that idea.

            The Royal CoC most of us know; that was not what was written.

            Now toddle off and march funny.

          • Ur not really aufait with all things military are you fella?
            Best not try and impart too many of your views, you might not like the response, toddle off back to your socialist haven and swop some stories with the brothers, suspect you will have a greater audience there.

          • No fella not at all, but I do wonder what/why you are posting and trying to achieve? Most just want to add to the debate/discussions, or even to learn for want of a better description, you on the other hand, who knows….?

          • You added too much.

            Which doesn’t really stack up, if true.

            When the RN is pressed for manning, should next incoming Govt cast an eye?

          • Well, while nobody has to believe anything that is posted, 30 odd years in the job probably gives me a better understanding/insight than most on this site. My aim is to give a better understanding of specifically my area of ops, but also to add to any debate that interests me whether I know anything about the subject or not. And no, I don’t always get things right!
            Nothing that I or the majority of those that have served the crown in whatever service post, have even come close to receiving a visit from SB. Most is open source or knowledge gained from experience which doesn’t breach the OSA or even higher. That is because we know and care if you like.
            It’s a tad bad mannered to slate people with a genuine interest in things posted on such forums. Whilst very few on here can match the knowledge of SMEs, I for one can’t match @DMs broad expanse of knowledge of all things military. Whilst he may well not have served in the forces, his contributions to posts are always relevant and knowledgeable. Some might not like that, but that’s their problem don’t you think?

          • And you’ve done that and provided fascinating insight into a dark area. I’ve acknowledged it in the past.

            Best leave it there, okay?

          • Fella, I know you have, so can’t/couldn’t really understand where you were coming from?
            No harm done mate, I’m off to enjoy a nice bottle or vin rouge, enjoy Ur evening too.

          • Meanwhile, our resident train spotter notes down everything; Special Branch will love you two.

            Interview without coffee?

          • 😆

            Evening David. I’d consider it an honor and a quite fascinating experience. If I disappear off the forum folk will know why.
            No, seriously, I got gently told off by Davey the other day about stuff that as far as I knew was actually public domain, so fair one if it raised eyebrows with him.
            But posting here concerning who is at Faslane will have the SB interested.
            I could indeed post about several places that would have them knocking on the door but I haven’t, and won’t.
            So I’ll go on my merry way as the resident “spotter”
            😄
            As you know, I’m non mil, unlike numerous on this site who I look up to as absolute hero’s. So if trainspotter is my level, I’ll take it. At least it is something.

          • DB, behave yerself. It’s well known sailors on HM gosunderboats don’t march any where. Majority of mateloes don’t march, they catch a taxi 🚖 👍🙄.

      • Off my head so cannot check…NDG, Chalfont Trainer, FOST elements, RNR, 1 MCM, NBC Clyde ( guess they go in your last section! )😜

        • Yes mate, then there are the SM Sqn personnel which I also forgot to mention. It soon adds up, 4000 isn’t really that large a number for the base.

          • I know there are others up there but at work so cannot check.
            …. Yes, I’m the sad train spotter that David refers to above! 😆

          • Indeed. I’ve mentioned this issue before on other subjects re UK defence. So many posters only see the wary end that goes bang, not the supporting cast that enable that bang to function. For all the functions of that place, it is not. I assume that total also included those at neighboring satellite sites that fall under the HMNB Clyde umbrella, like Coulport.

          • Yes mate it does include places like Coulport and Loch Goil(but not the civvies), there are so many support elements you tend to lose track of them all. Numbers wise, the ‘tip of the spear’ actually make up less than 40% of the actual numbers, which many don’t seem to realise, unfortunately.

          • To be fair its an easy mistake, you never saw them near a Fleet boat, it was always Shearwater that did our ‘whatnots’. They always had plenty parking spaces too….. pricks !. 😉

            Agree that its easy to have about 4000 matelots in Fassers, throw in all the ‘sick bay rangers’ and its a piece of piss to hit those numbers, a thousand sea going submariners, 3000 off with stress and depression sounds about right. 😜

          • Regards the delays to SSN maintenance due to shortage of dry dock availability at Devonport, just reading that MoD will procure 2 floating docks for Faslane. Useful?

          • Evening mate, read the same myself, readily surprised too. They don’t come cheap, believe both would be based in Faslane, as that’s where the SM flt is these days. But yes, a very useful facility, never understood why we never replaced the old AFD 60 when it was up there, although I think that the navy saw the ‘Shiplift’ as the answer.
            I can’t see these things being built and in service much before the late 20’s, by then dry dock availability should be ok in Devon port. Still, always very very useful to have redundancy in this area.

          • Hopefully a sign of eventual expansion in SSN. Or, more realistically, some extra depth.
            I’d not heard of AFD60, interesting.

  3. But the effect on the local economy of the base, as a whole, is massive having 5+k people spending money in local shops and amenities.

    Take that away and the local economy tanks.

  4. Interestingly I would say that actually if you take the words of the conservative MP he is not actually being mendacious…if there are 6000 employees at the site then that would infact directly impact on the livelihoods of around 14000-15000 people…the average household in the UK is 2.4 people so those 6000 jobs therefore impact on the Livelihood of everyone in the household ( livelihood does not mean job or directly employed)… then you have the service jobs which are alway dependent on the largest employer in the region..shop workers estate agents, holiday companies, leisure providers etc…again this would impact on a huge numbers of service workers and their families….so I’m afraid I don’t think in this case the conservative was actually wrong..as he did not use the word employed…

  5. This is glorious.

    Two parties paddling up creeks in boats with holes in the bottom, trying hasty Hail Mary Passes to save their butts at the next Election.

    Great stuff, George.

    Cynical – Moi?

    Being more constructive, perhaps it is a joint game of Four Dimensional Chess to confuse the Russians.

  6. The issue is a lack of actual reliable figures and a failure to explain the assumptions made to support the statements. In essence a lot of the time it is arguing semantics and minutiae! This is the problem with allowing politicians to open their mouths and speak when propaganda and position is their prime motivation.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here