JEREMY Corbyn is under pressure to persuade the Labour party over the coming weeks to reverse its policy of supporting the renewal of Trident.
Dr Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said scrapping the renewal of the system was of “fundamental importance” to the new Labour leader, who is vice chair of her organisation and a longstanding opponent of nuclear weapons.
She spoke out after Tom Watson, the party’s new deputy leader, and a figure seen as a crucial linchpin in securing party unity, accepted that he and many other MPs backed the renewal of Trident, the current party policy.
“There are different views. Nobody wants to live in a nuclear world but it’s how you disarm,” he said.
“I think the deterrent has kept the peace in the world for half a century and I hope we can have that debate in the party”.
But Hudson insisted there was little time for a protracted discussion within the party as a decision on the renewal of Trident is due to be made in March.
“It has to come soon as the vote in Westminster is expected in March 2016. Jeremy is very aware of that, so therefore Labour will have to have a rapid and early debate about it.
“It can’t be put on the backburner because of the main gate decision on building the new subs which is due early next year. If it wasn’t coming up for five years, maybe they could have an on-going discussion, but there is this pressure of time. Whatever happens over Trident is absolutely of critical importance for every single British citizen and beyond. It’s of global importance.”
She added: “The cost implications of the renewal of Trident – at least £100 billion – is something which will impact on government spending massively. I know the issue is of fundamental importance to Jeremy Corbyn, it was a central plank of his campaign, got an incredibly popular and good response and I think there is every hope we will see a change in Labour policy.”
Hudson suggested she would like to see a decision either at or around the time of the Labour party conference at the end of this month.
“We have Labour party conference coming up, so I don’t know if that could be a forum for it to be brought up or whether it would be done more internally,” she said.
The issue is expected to be discussed when Corbyn travels to Scotland later this week to meet senior figures in the Scottish party.
Alex Rowley, who was elected deputy leader of Scottish Labour last month, is also opposed to the renewal of Trident and has called for a UK wide referendum on the subject.
During his campaign, Corbyn put forward a “defence diversification programme” which would entail thousands of Scottish workers employed in the nuclear industry moving to “socially productive” jobs in renewable energy, railways and housing.
Because decommissioning the system would take 60 years to complete, he said the programme would sustain many jobs for decades to come and other defence-sector roles would be maintained through better procurement policies.
His policy document explained: “We are making the case for a defence diversification agency because we have a moral duty, and strategic defence and international commitments, to make Britain and the world a safer place.”
“Hopefully people like Tom Watson will be open-minded and listen to all the arguments, particularly as Jeremy’s defence diversification policy is so strong so Labour MPs who had concerns about employment at Barrow, and there are those concerns too at Faslane, should be put to rest,” Hudson added.
“I don’t know what the timetable will be [for Labour to put forward a new policy] but I am confident that if Labour has an open debate about Trident then Jeremy’s view will prevail.”
Corbyn was declared Ed Miliband’s successor on Saturday on the back of a surge of support from activists that saw him attract a massive 59.5 per cent of votes – topping the ballot among party members as well as trade unionists and new supporters.
The immediate resignations of a string of senior figures who declared themselves unable to serve in his top team swiftly underlined the task he faced uniting the party behind his anti-war and anti-austerity platform.
Senior party veterans such as Peter Mandelson and David Blunkett were among those warning that the party risked becoming unelectable without action to temper the new leader’s radical mandate.
Watson – appearing on BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show in place of Corbyn, who pulled out to concentrate on shaping his new team – said he understood the concerns of moderate colleagues about the seismic political shift.
“He wants to build a broad-based party, he wants a front bench that represents all the talents and all the views,” he said.
Asked about reports of behind-the-scenes moves to oust Corbyn, he insisted: “There is zero chance of that happening; Labour Party members will not accept that.”
James Kelly: Corbyn will inject a dose of unpredictability into the Holyrood race
Corbyn's shadow cabinet to be gender-balanced
Kevin McKenna: Jeremy Corbyn's victory gives us a glimpse behind the mask of his opponents
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here