Friday, 18 May 2007

Trident Vox Pop

By Luke Starre & Matthew Kiernan

The Labour party has announced potential plans for the £20bn renewal of Britain’s nuclear deterrent Trident.

Investment in the programme will be spread over the next 30 years and Tony Blair is eager to push the proposal through Parliament before he stands down in 2007.

But even given the state of the current world climate does the British public think the scheme is worth it?

"Depends on how much they’ve got in the budget," says Anthony Davis, a 27-year old graphic designer from Sutton Rd, Charminster.

"Is national security still that important? It’s debatable and it won’t make any difference to my life."

"We’ve already got some and if we needed to use them it would be a nuclear war and all countries would loose out," laughs Chris Cox, 20, a sports management student at Bournemouth University.

It’s a view reiterated by Sue Barrett from Stanfield Rd, Winton.
"If there’s going to be a nuclear explosion they’ll be mass death anyway, so what’ s the point?"

Should we be trying to get along instead of out doing each other then? 19-year-old Carl Arreghini thinks so.

"They’re effectively weapons of mass destruction," mused the Law student. "It would make me feel safer if no one had them rather than us having more then someone else."

"The more countries who have them the more likely they’ll be used," agrees Christine Howland of Cranmer Rd, Winton.

"Nuclear weapons do more damage than good", adds Tessa Gustafsen, a waitress from Copenhagen, Denmark. "Actually, I don’t think they do any good".

So is no one bothered about protection?

"It’ll come to a sad time if we need nuclear weapons to feel safe at night", says Tanya Davis, 28, from Charminster.

What about the costs?

"Money should be channelled into education and children", adds Ms Davis.

Liam Henderson from St. Luke’s Rd in Winton thinks ‘they’ll spend it on the military anyway, plus we can use the ones we have’.

"We shouldn’t spend it on a nuclear deterrent," says retired builder Roger Anderson. "Instead it should be used to help stop climate change."

It’s not an opinion shared by all though.

Jack Salisbury feels efforts need to be stepped up saying, "money should be spent on more aggressive tactics – not war however".

Peace keeping and negotiation are what the 19-year-old business student suggests.
So perhaps Andrew Wilson sums up the public consensus.

"I don’t like nuclear weapons anyway and I’d hope they’ll all disappear eventually," dreams the 38-year-old market trader from Lymington.

Mark: 60 (2:1)