Monday, 21 June 2010
DEFENCE REVIEW MUST ADDRESS ‘MAMMOTH’ SCOTTISH UNDERSPEND
DEFENCE REVIEW MUST ADDRESS ‘MAMMOTH’ SCOTTISH UNDERSPEND
Speaking in a Commons debate on the strategic defence and security
review SNP Westminster leader and Defence spokesperson, Angus
Robertson MP, has warned over future cuts to the defence footprint in
Scotland.
Highlighting the £5.6bn defence underspend in Scotland and 10,000 job
loses since the last strategic review, Mr Robertson said:
“Scotland has already been massively short-changed on its share of
defence spending and this trend must not continue as the government
embarks on the strategic review.
“To proceed with a strategic review that does not address the mammoth
cutbacks in defence spending we have seen in Scotland over the last
decade risks even more damaging decline for the defence footprint in
Scotland.
“The MoD’s own figures show that £5.6bn less has been spent on defence
in Scotland than has been contributed by taxpayers, and 10,000 defence
jobs have been lost in Scotland since the last strategic review.
“People in Scotland support our armed forces, and are proud of the
nation's military tradition, but those UK politicians responsible for
the decrease in jobs, the overstretch, and the under-equipping of our
brave servicemen must now address this decline.”
Mr Robertson also expressed his dismay that the future of the Trident
nuclear weapons system had been excluded from the strategic defence
and security review.
Mr Robertson added:
“To undertake a strategic review which excludes the hyper-expensive
Trident programme, while considering cuts to conventional, front-line
forces, is a sham exercise. A defence review is essential to
prioritise our defence needs in a changed world, but you cannot have a
meaningful debate about that if you start by excluding the future of
the Trident programme.
“Whatever way you look at it, Trident is morally, economically and
politically untenable – that is why the SNP will continue to fight to
have it scrapped altogether.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment