DOCSLIB.ORG

Cabinet Secretary's Review of Papers Relating to the Release of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cabinet Secretary's Review of Papers Relating to the Release of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi CABINET SECRETARY’S REVIEW OF PAPERS RELATING TO THE RELEASE OF ABDELBASET AL-MEGRAHI Monday 7 February 2011 1 Contents CABINET SECRETARY‟S REVIEW OF PAPERS RELATING TO THE RELEASE OF ABDELBASET AL-MEGRAHI .................................................................................... 3 Papers being published alongside this report (not previously public) 25 July 2007; footnote 6; letter from PM to Col Qadhafi; ................................................ 19 19 September 2007; footnote 10; Ministry of Justice Submission ..................................... 20 26 September 2007; footnote 15; letter from PM to Col Qadhafi; ..................................... 24 28 September 2007; footnote 11; Jack Straw to Gordon Brown PTA ................................ 26 2 October 2007; footnote 12; note from HMA Tripoli to the FCO ................................... 28 2 November 2007; footnote 18; record of phone call between Jack Straw and Kenny MacAskill .................................................................................................................. 30 7 November 2007; footnote 17; Ministry of Justice Submission on PTA ........................... 31 19 November 2007; footnote 14; record of Simon McDonald meeting with BP ................. 37 7 – 19 December 2007; footnote 21; correspondence between Jack Straw and Des Browne; 38 19 December 2007; footnote 22; record of phone call between Jack Straw and Kenny MacAskill; ................................................................................................................. 41 18 February 2008; footnote 25; letter from Gordon Brown to Col Qadhafi; ....................... 42 29 September 2008; footnote 26; Ministry of Justice Submission on PTA ......................... 44 10 October 2008; footnote 27; Ministry of Justice Submission – Call with First Minister ... 47 13 October 2008; footnote 28; Ministry of Justice record Jack Straw call with First Minister ................................................................................................................................. 55 17 October 2008; footnote 29; letter from Bill Rammell to Abdulatti Obidi ...................... 57 21 October 2008; footnote 30; Cabinet Office Submission to Gordon Brown .................... 59 24 October 2008; footnote 32; record of phone call between Jack Straw and Alex Salmond 61 1 3 November 2008; footnote 31; FCO Submission on handling Megrahi’s Health ..... 63 7 November 2008; footnote 34; record of phone call between Jack Straw and Alex Salmond ................................................................................................................................. 72 13 November 2008; footnote 35; FCO Submission on Judicial Agreements ...................... 73 9 December 2008; footnote 37 and 39; FCO Submission – Advice to the SG .................... 79 15 December 2008; footnote 38; FCO letter to SG on foreign policy advice ...................... 83 22 January 2009; footnote 41; FCO Submission – Contingency Planning ......................... 91 25 February 2009; footnote 42; Cabinet Office record of Cross Whitehall meeting .......... 100 20 April 2009; footnote 43; FCO Submission – Further Handling on Megrahi ................. 103 21-23 April 2009; footnote 43; FCO Submission – Further Handling on Megrahi – PUS and Ministerial Responses ............................................................................................... 113 20 April 2009; footnote 44; FCO Submission – Ratification of Treaties .......................... 115 21 April 2009; footnote 44; FCO Submission – Ratification of Treaties – Ministerial Response ................................................................................................................. 120 22 April 2009; footnote 45 & 51; Ministry Of Justice Submission – Jack Straw call with First Minister ................................................................................................................... 121 29 April 2009; footnote 45; MoJ Record of Jack Straw call with First Minister ............... 126 24 June 2009; footnote 50; FCO email – Foreign Policy advice to the Scottish Government ............................................................................................................................... 128 29 June 2009; footnote 47; FCO Submission – Legal Advice to Scottish Government ...... 130 13 August 2009; footnote 57; FCO Submission to No10 – Impending Scottish Government Decisions ................................................................................................................. 139 20 August 2009; footnote 57; letter from PM to Col Qadhafi; ........................................ 141 2 CABINET SECRETARY’S REVIEW OF PAPERS RELATING TO THE RELEASE OF ABDELBASET AL-MEGRAHI Issue 1. On 20 July, the Prime Minister asked me to conduct a review of HMG papers relating to the release of the Lockerbie bomber to see whether more needed to be published to ensure the fullest possible explanation of the circumstances surrounding this decision. 2. The review has sought in particular to assess whether there is any new evidence that: i. the UK Government directly or indirectly pressurised or lobbied the Scottish Government for the release of Mr Megrahi (either under the PTA or on compassionate grounds); ii. pressure was placed on the Scottish Government by BP for the release of Mr Megrahi (under the Prisoner Transfer Agreement or on compassionate grounds); iii. the Libyans were told there were linkages between BP‟s investment and the release of Mr Megrahi either under the Prisoner Transfer Agreement or on compassionate grounds. 3. The review has also considered what information is already in the public domain and what further documents should be released that would add to or clarify the public picture of events surrounding Mr Megrahi‟s release. The review has also considered which of these documents should be withheld or redacted because of the risk of significant prejudice, for example to international relations, which is not outweighed by any public interest in disclosure. Where material I have reviewed does not relate to these criteria, I have not recommended publication as part of this report. 4. The review has been rigorous and comprehensive. All relevant UK1 Government Departments have participated. No class of information has been excluded from scrutiny, and this information includes Ministerial and official correspondence, both internal and with other bodies, including other governments or 1 The review has not considered papers held by the Scottish Government 3 organisations; advice to Ministers; records of meetings (both official and Ministerial); records of telephone conversation; and internal emails. 5. I set out below the outline of events that the documentation I have reviewed provides. Outline of Events Pre-May 2007 6. On 21 December 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie in Scotland, killing all 259 passengers and crew and 11 residents of Lockerbie. In August 1998, the US and UK Governments put forward a detailed joint proposal to the UN Security Council for the trial of the two Libyan suspects accused of the bombing. The joint UK-US letter to the UN of 24 August 19982 stated that “If found guilty, the two accused will serve their sentence in the United Kingdom”. Libya agreed to the proposal and the Lockerbie trial began in the Netherlands on 3 May 2000. On 31 January 2001, Mr Megrahi was found guilty and Lamin Fhimah not guilty. Mr Megrahi subsequently appealed against his conviction. His appeal was refused on 14 March 2002. A second appeal was launched in 2008 but ultimately abandoned by Mr Megrahi in August 2009. 7. With the handing over of the two suspects, the UK began a process to normalise relations with Libya. Diplomatic relations were resumed in 1999 after Libyan admission of responsibility for WPC Fletcher‟s murder. After nine months of highly secret negotiations with the UK and US, public announcements were made by Libya, the UK and US on 19 December 2003 announcing Libya‟s agreement to give up its WMD programmes and limit its ballistic missile programme3. As part of this, Libya agreed to immediate international inspections and to be bound by relevant international agreements covering the dismantling of its nuclear, biological, chemical and missile programmes. This resulted in the then Prime Minister Blair‟s first visit to Libya in March 2004. May 2007- September 2008 8. During his final visit to Libya as Prime Minister on 30 May 2007, Tony Blair signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)4 with the Libyan Government, which 2 In public domain – UN website 3 In public domain 4 In public domain – FCO website 4 included a commitment to negotiate a Prisoner Transfer Agreement5 (PTA) within 12 months. 9. During the same visit, Tony Blair witnessed the signing of an Exploration and Production Sharing Agreement (EPSA) between BP and the Libyan Government. There were expectations that the Libyan General Peoples Committee would ratify the Agreement by September, but this did not happen. After Gordon Brown acceded the office of Prime Minister in July 2007, he wrote6 to Colonel Qadhafi expressing his desire to continue an “open and honest dialogue” between the UK and Libya. He made no mention of the PTA negotiations or judicial cooperation, but did emphasise the value in strengthening commercial links. 10. It was clear that the Libyans considered a PTA could open the door to Mr Megrahi‟s future transfer to Libya. HMG was also clear in its initial discussions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • November 2003
    Nations and Regions: The Dynamics of Devolution Quarterly Monitoring Programme Scotland Quarterly Report November 2003 The monitoring programme is jointly funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust Introduction: James Mitchell 1. The Executive: Barry Winetrobe 2. The Parliament: Mark Shephard 3. The Media: Philip Schlesinger 4. Public Attitudes: John Curtice 5. UK intergovernmental relations: Alex Wright 6. Relations with Europe: Alex Wright 7. Relations with Local Government: Neil McGarvey 8. Finance: David Bell 9. Devolution disputes & litigation: Barry Winetrobe 10. Political Parties: James Mitchell 11. Public Policies: Barry Winetrobe ISBN: 1 903903 09 2 Introduction James Mitchell The policy agenda for the last quarter in Scotland was distinct from that south of the border while there was some overlap. Matters such as identity cards and foundation hospitals are figuring prominently north of the border though long-running issues concerned with health and law and order were important. In health, differences exist at policy level but also in terms of rhetoric – with the Health Minister refusing to refer to patients as ‘customers’. This suggests divergence without major disputes in devolutionary politics. An issue which has caused problems across Britain and was of significance this quarter was the provision of accommodation for asylum seekers as well as the education of the children of asylum seekers. Though asylum is a retained matter, the issue has devolutionary dimension as education is a devolved matter. The other significant event was the challenge to John Swinney’s leadership of the Scottish National Party. A relatively unknown party activist challenged Swinney resulting in a drawn-out campaign over the Summer which culminated in a massive victory for Swinney at the SNP’s annual conference.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Wednesday Volume 501 25 November 2009 No. 5 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday 25 November 2009 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2009 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 513 25 NOVEMBER 2009 514 my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and House of Commons Arran (Ms Clark). In a letter I received from Ofcom, the regulator states: Wednesday 25 November 2009 “Ofcom does not have the power to mandate ISPs”— internet service providers. Surely that power is overdue, because otherwise, many of my constituents, along with The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock those of my colleagues, will continue to receive a poor broadband service. PRAYERS Mr. Murphy: My hon. Friend makes some very important points about the decision-making powers and architecture [MR.SPEAKER in the Chair] that will ensure we achieve 90 per cent. broadband penetration. We are trying to ensure that the market provides most of that, and we expect that up to two thirds—60 to 70 per cent.—of homes will be able to Oral Answers to Questions access super-fast broadband through the market. However, the Government will have to do additional things, and my hon. Friend can make the case for giving Ofcom SCOTLAND additional powers; but, again, we are absolutely determined that no one be excluded for reasons of geography or income.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotland: Toward a New Settlement? in This Issue
    | THE CONSTITUTION UNIT NEWSLETTER | ISSUE 38 | JANUARY 2008 | MONITOR SCOTLAND: TOWARD A NEW SETTLEMENT? IN THIS ISSUE The constitutional debate in Scotland in the SNP White Paper) with ideas on reconciling continues apace. In the last Monitor we more devolution with a renewal of the UK BRITISH BILL OF RIGHTS 2 reported on the SNP Government’s White union (which mark out a very different agenda). Paper Choosing Scotland’s Future – Especially notable were her ideas on risk-sharing A National Conversation. This set out options through fiscal solidarity across the UK, and those for Scotland’s constitutional future, ranging on guaranteeing rights of ‘social citizenship’ PARTY FUNDING REFORM 2 from further-reaching devolution to the SNP’s across the UK. Emphasising social rights across own preference of independence. jurisdictions suggests a concern to build common purposes – or, put another way, limits to policy EU REFORM TREATY 3 Beyond their commitment to ignore the SNP’s variation – to which risk-sharing and solidarity can ‘national conversation’, the other main parties be put to work in a UK-wide framework. in Scotland were generally silent on Scotland’s PARLIAMENT 3 constitutional options until a speech by the new This is a bold agenda. For it to work much would Labour leader in Scotland, Wendy Alexander, at depend on a willingness in Westminster and the University of Edinburgh on St Andrew’s Day, Whitehall to think creatively about rebalancing DEVOLUTION 5 30 November. This set out a unionist perspective the union. If devolution is to have a stronger on constitutional change; unlike the SNP White UK-wide context, then the devolved institutions Paper, independence was not an option.
    [Show full text]
  • SPOKES Leaflet 86 Late 2003 and Richard Lochhead [SNP]
    POLITICIANS WE LIKE!! Following the Scottish Parliament election the Cross Party ESSENTIAL CONTACTS Cycle Group re-formed. Mark Ruskell [Green] is new Cycle training: 01505,614302 [email protected]. convener, with vice-conveners Bristow Muldoon [Uib] Traveline Scotland: rail, bus, ferry info [lo include cycle aspects SPOKES Leaflet 86 Late 2003 and Richard Lochhead [SNP]. Meetings are open to the and eyclemap lealleis?] 0870,608,2508 tvww.lraveline.org.uk. public. Details: [email protected]. Potholes, glass on cycleroutes, broken lights, etc anywhere SPOKES, The Lothian Cycle Campaign, St Martins Church, 232 Dairy Road, Edinburgh EHll 2JG ® 0131.313,2114 hIlD;//www,spokes,or£,uk/ /This is a mail address and answerphone - SPOKES is a voluntary organisation mtk nasiaffj Some 15 MSPs [below] signed up for Bike to Work day in Lothian [including Edinburgh], or Falkirk District: and/or joined the Bike Breakfast MSP ride 118.5.03.phoio]. [Use number oti nearesi lamp-posi lo report exact location]. Phone Lab: Sarah Boyack.KcnMcIniosh, PaulintMcNcill, B-Muldoiin 0800.232.123; Or see www.adinburfih.^ov.uk - Iransporl -Clarence. BIKE FUNDS THREAT Grn: Mark Ballard, Cliris Ballance, Robin Harper, Mark Ruskell Bad glass/dumping [Ed only]: Rapid Response 0808.100.3365 Despite two welcome government announcements which SNP: Richard Lochhead, Jim Mather SS/"; Rosie Kane Smoky commercial vehicles: 01506.445216. will assist smaller cycle projects, overall cycle project LibD: Tavish Scotl, Nora Radcliffe Con: Brian Monlcilh Drink-driving, speeding, driving whilst disqualified, and spending is set to fall drastically in less than two years. other road crime: Freephone Crimestoppers 0800.555.111.
    [Show full text]
  • Spice Briefing
    MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY AND REGION Scottish SESSION 1 Parliament This Fact Sheet provides a list of all Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) who served during the first parliamentary session, Fact sheet 12 May 1999-31 March 2003, arranged alphabetically by the constituency or region that they represented. Each person in Scotland is represented by 8 MSPs – 1 constituency MSPs: Historical MSP and 7 regional MSPs. A region is a larger area which covers a Series number of constituencies. 30 March 2007 This Fact Sheet is divided into 2 parts. The first section, ‘MSPs by constituency’, lists the Scottish Parliament constituencies in alphabetical order with the MSP’s name, the party the MSP was elected to represent and the corresponding region. The second section, ‘MSPs by region’, lists the 8 political regions of Scotland in alphabetical order. It includes the name and party of the MSPs elected to represent each region. Abbreviations used: Con Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Green Scottish Green Party Lab Scottish Labour LD Scottish Liberal Democrats SNP Scottish National Party SSP Scottish Socialist Party 1 MSPs BY CONSTITUENCY: SESSION 1 Constituency MSP Region Aberdeen Central Lewis Macdonald (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen North Elaine Thomson (Lab) North East Scotland Aberdeen South Nicol Stephen (LD) North East Scotland Airdrie and Shotts Karen Whitefield (Lab) Central Scotland Angus Andrew Welsh (SNP) North East Scotland Argyll and Bute George Lyon (LD) Highlands & Islands Ayr John Scott (Con)1 South of Scotland Ayr Ian
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting of the Parliament
    MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENT Thursday 19 February 2015 Session 4 © Parliamentary copyright. Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Information on the Scottish Parliament’s copyright policy can be found on the website - www.scottish.parliament.uk or by contacting Public Information on 0131 348 5000 Thursday 19 February 2015 CONTENTS Col. GENERAL QUESTION TIME .................................................................................................................................. 1 Insult to Injury Campaign .............................................................................................................................. 1 Protecting Vulnerable Groups Scheme (Applications) ................................................................................. 2 NHS Lanarkshire (Meetings) ........................................................................................................................ 3 River Beds (Assistance to Farmers) ............................................................................................................. 3 Hospitals (Minimum Staffing Levels) ............................................................................................................ 4 National Health Service Central Register (Scotland) Regulations 2006 (Privacy Concerns) ...................... 6 Police Scotland (Merger) .............................................................................................................................. 7 NHS Borders (Meetings) .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministers
    By Hazel Armstrong , Chris Rhodes The Ministerial Code and the 12 August 2021 Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests Summary 1 The 2019 Ministerial Code 2 The Register of Ministerial Interests 3 Proposals for reform of the Code 4 Investigating breaches of the Code 5 History of the Ministerial Code commonslibrary.parliament.uk Number CBP 03750 The Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests Image Credits Chamber-049 by UK Parliament image. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. Disclaimer The Commons Library does not intend the information in our research publications and briefings to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. We have published it to support the work of MPs. You should not rely upon it as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. We do not accept any liability whatsoever for any errors, omissions or misstatements contained herein. You should consult a suitably qualified professional if you require specific advice or information. Read our briefing ‘Legal help: where to go and how to pay’ for further information about sources of legal advice and help. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. Feedback Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Please note that authors are not always able to engage in discussions with members of the public who express opinions about the content of our research, although we will carefully consider and correct any factual errors.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministry of Justice Resource Accounts 2007-08 HC
    Resource Accounts 2007-08 Presented pursuant to the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000, c.20, s.6 (4) Ministry of Justice Resource Accounts 2007-08 (For the year ended 31 March 2008) Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 21 July 2008 LONDON: The Stationery Office 21 July 2008 HC 869 Price: £25.75 © Crown Copyright 2008 The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] ISBN: 9780102957631 Contents Annual Report 5 Management Commentary 19 Remuneration Report 44 Statement of Accounting Officers’ Responsibilities 60 Statement on Internal Control 62 Certificate and Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the House of Commons 73 The Accounting Schedules: Statement of Parliamentary Supply 76 Operating Cost Statement 78 Statement of Recognised Gains and Losses 79 Balance Sheet 80 Cash Flow Statement 81 Consolidated Statement of Operating Costs by Departmental Aims and Objectives 81 Notes to the Accounts 85 Ministry of Justice Resource Accounts 2007-08 | Annual Report 5 Annual Report Scope These accounts relate to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), for the year ended 31 March 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • I Bitterly Regret the Day I Comgromised the Unity of My Party by Admitting
    Scottish Government Yearbook 1990 FACTIONS, TENDENCIES AND CONSENSUS IN THE SNP IN THE 1980s James Mitchell I bitterly regret the day I comgromised the unity of my party by admitting the second member.< A work written over a decade ago maintained that there had been limited study of factional politics<2l. This is most certainly the case as far as the Scottish National Party is concerned. Indeed, little has been written on the party itself, with the plethora of books and articles which were published in the 1970s focussing on the National movement rather than the party. During the 1980s journalistic accounts tended to see debates and disagreements in the SNP along left-right lines. The recent history of the party provides an important case study of factional politics. The discussion highlights the position of the '79 Group, a left-wing grouping established in the summer of 1979 which was finally outlawed by the party (with all other organised factions) at party conference in 1982. The context of its emergence, its place within the SNP and the reaction it provoked are outlined. Discussion then follows of the reasons for the development of unity in the context of the foregoing discussion of tendencies and factions. Definitions of factions range from anthropological conceptions relating to attachment to a personality to conceptions of more ideologically based groupings within liberal democratic parties<3l. Rose drew a distinction between parliamentary party factions and tendencies. The former are consciously organised groupings with a membership based in Parliament and a measure of discipline and cohesion. The latter were identified as a stable set of attitudes rather than a group of politicians but not self-consciously organised<4l.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Justice Committee Petition PE1370
    Justice Committee Petition PE1370: Justice for Megrahi Written submission from Justice for Megrahi Ex-Scottish Government Ministers: Political Consequences of Public Statements On 28th June 2011 the Public Petitions Committee referred the Justice for Megrahi (JfM ) petition PE1370 to the Justice Committee for consideration. Its terms were as follows. ‘Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to open an independent inquiry into the 2001 Kamp van Zeist conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.’ The petition was first heard by the Justice Committee on 8th November 2011. On 6th June, 2013, as part of its consideration, the Justice Committee wrote to Kenny MacAskill MSP, then Cabinet Secretary for Justice, asking for the Government’s comments on our request for a public enquiry. In his reply of 24th June 2013, while acknowledging, that under the Inquiries Act 2005, the Scottish Ministers had the power to establish an inquiry, he concluded: ‘Any conclusions reached by an inquiry would not have any effect on either upholding or overturning the conviction as it is appropriately a court of law that has this power. In addition to the matters noted above, we would also note that Lockerbie remains a live on-going criminal investigation. In light of the above, the Scottish Government has no plans to institute an independent inquiry into the conviction of Mr Al-Megrahi.’ At this time Alex Salmond was the First Minister and with Mr MacAskill was intimately involved in the release of Mr Megrahi on 20th August 2009, a decision which caused worldwide controversy.
    [Show full text]
  • Lobby Programme Emphasis in 2008 Keep Our Future Afloat Campaign
    Keep our Future Afloat 2008 Lobby programme emphasis in 2008 • Continuing to influence all political parties and shipbuilding industry leaders. • Meeting with the new Defence Procurement Minister, Baroness Taylor at the earliest opportunity. • Drawing attention to potential workload gaps and implications for production and design skills retention. • Securing orders for Barrow’s core expertise submarines, 7 Astute class. The UK needs a fleet that can surge in times of crisis, 4, 5 or 6 are not enough. • Highlighting Barrow’s role in the successor submarine (Vanguard replacement) programme and the need to proceed with the replacement deterrent fleet. • Promoting Barrow’s core competency and role in delivering nuclear submarines. • Highlighting Barrow’s role in building the Future Aircraft Carriers. • Seeking a role for Barrow in the MARS programme. • Publishing a lobby paper highlighting the benefits of the UK nuclear power station programme as a means of creating diversification opportunities for UK shipyards, a way of sustaining key nuclear skills and of enhancing the implementation of the Defence Industrial Strategy requirement to sustain key capabilities and promote opportunity for civil nuclear reactor build being undertaken in the UK instead of overseas. • Supporting BAE SYSTEMS diversification moves, particularly into nuclear and upstream oil and gas. • Ensuring that overseas shipyards do not gain a share of the market at the expense of Barrow and support build of warlike ships in UK not EU. • Securing MoD clarification of what it regards as ‘complex’ and ‘less complex’ naval ships which are not defined in the Defence Industrial Strategy. • Helping implement the new Defence Industrial Strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Replacing Trident: Who Will Make the Decisions and How?
    Oxford ResearchGroup | Replacing Trident: Who Will Make the Decisions and How? August 2006 REPLACING TRIDENT: WHO WILL MAKE THE DECISIONS AND HOW? Nick Ritchie Executive Summary The government has declared that a decision will be made during the current parliament that will determine the medium to long-term future of Britain’s nuclear arsenal that consists of the Trident nuclear weapon system.1 The decision will either be to replace the Trident system, to upgrade the existing system, or to run the system to the end of its service life and then relinquish a nuclear capability altogether. It is unlikely that the UK will choose not to replace or upgrade the Trident system and become a non-nuclear weapon state. It is far more likely that a successor system will be chosen or the service life of the current system extended and that the UK will remain a nuclear weapon power for the foreseeable future. Decisions about Britain’s nuclear arsenal have traditionally been shrouded in secrecy. Whilst it is clear that some secrecy is needed for the security and effectiveness of nuclear weapon systems once deployed, this justification is often used to render decisions about Britain’s nuclear future unaccountable to parliament and the British public. In order to maximise government accountability for its forthcoming decision it is necessary to understand the likely policy-making process and the context within which decisions are likely to be made. The paper begins by briefly examined what decisions are required in the current parliament. It then argues that there are three powerful drivers in favour of the status quo that will shape the policy-making process.
    [Show full text]