Published at 16:49, Friday, 11 January 2013

IT is fantasy to claim it would be possible to replace all the jobs lost in Barrow if Trident is scrapped, John Woodcock has said.

FUTURE BAE Systems’ Devonshire Dock Hall in Barrow. The Westminster launch of the Nuclear Education Trust’s report into the Trident Alternatives Review and the future of shipbuilding in Barrow took place yesterday LINDSEY DICKINGS REF: 50007121B001

The Barrow and Furness MP attended the Westminster launch of the Nuclear Education Trust’s report into the Trident Alternatives Review and the future of Barrow.

It concluded, while Barrow is heavily dependent on BAE Systems as an employer, “the economic impact of an option other than like-for-like replacement is not “a ‘binary’ choice between 6,000 employed or none”.

Mr Woodcock said after yesterday’s meeting: “I am working really hard to look at ways in which we can diversify the economy, but this is a debate where a lot of people come with preconceptions.

“I think it is important we do not get distracted from the fact that up until now there has been nothing which has been shown could protect the country as effectively and cost-effectively as ballistic missiles fired from submarines.

“The national and international climate is really difficult at the moment. Barrow has to fight for every business and every investment, and we have had some success.

“But the idea we can suddenly find something that can replace 5,000 well-paid manufacturing jobs is a fantasy.

“We have to guard against people making well-meaning but infuriatingly vague assertions that Barrow should be found alternative work when actually there is nothing that would match the level of investment that submarine building produces.”

Mr Woodcock warned the meeting to guard against people arguing for different forms of nuclear deterrence. He stressed a decision not to proceed with a like-for-like, continuous at sea deterrent would impact not just now but well into the future.

He said: “It is not simply a matter of jobs disappearing in future decades.”

If the UK stopped building submarines, it was probable both Barrow and the UK would never be able to manufacture them again and the nation would have to buy “off-the-shelf” from other countries.

Mr Woodcock said some suggestions on what Barrow could build instead, like wind turbines, were interesting but did not come close to submarines, while others, such as glass-bottomed leisure submarines were wishful thinking, if not barking mad.

Terry Waiting, chairman of the Keep Our Future Afloat campaign, told the Evening Mail: “What this report seems to ignore is in the North West alone there are more than 90 supply chain companies with a value of around £78m feeding into that.

“To just switch submarine building off in Barrow and go into a new venture will take a long time and cost a lot of money – I can’t see the private sector doing that.”

Former defence minister Sir Nick Harvey told the meeting they were talking about another generation of weapons of mass destruction, and if the UK should remain a nuclear power until 2070.

“The industrial consequences must be taken into account, but we cannot possibly make a decision of that magnitude on the basis of the industrial considerations.

“We have to determine on national security and then deal with the industrial implications, it cannot be the other way round.”

Published by http://www.nwemail.co.uk