<<...Trident: no need for like-for-like replacement, says Danny Alexander
Exclusive: Chief secretary to the Treasury tells Guardian there are 'credible and compelling alternatives'...>>
The Trident review, which Alexander is heading, is to be presented in June and it's not yet complete.
Quite separate to the costings/pros vs. cons etc etc, this Review will generate considerable debate before any decision has to reached sometime after the next election. (Whatever, we all know it won't be cheap and we're broke.)
Why Alexander, the Chancellor's winger, gave an exclusive interview and expounded his views now, so far in advance, puzzled me but briefly.
All becomes clearer when one realises that your man is Clegg appointed Jockinese top Liberal MP and the newspaper scooping this exclusive is the Lib. favoured Guardian.
Not an altogether subtle method of pre-decision propaganda but a far more blatant attempt at mind-setting than merely 'leaking' the final Review by a (nominated but anonymous) CS nearer the actual completed Trident Review release date.
Takes all of the heat from the 'Serpents & Sir Humphrey would be very proud of him. :roll:
The programme raised the assertion that retention of the Deterrent will probably be more political than military. That was developed to consider the legitamacy of it being funded from the core defence budget. If the Cs o S say it's essential, they fund it. If HM Government says it's essential, it pays for it.
What grips me is the assumption that this decision can be postponed for years. That's a big gamble on how long the V Boat reactors will last for.