Keir Starmer welcomes decrepit nuclear submarine to Scotland 'after record patrol'
KEIR Starmer welcomed a decrepit-looking nuclear submarine as it surfaced in Scotland after what is reported to be a record-breaking time at sea, amid growing concerns about the safety of the Trident programme.
The Prime Minister posted a video of him and Defence Secretary John Healey at Faslane welcoming the crew back to land – after they were said to have spent 204 days at sea.
That amounts to nearly seven months on patrol which, according to the specialist news site Navy Lookout, would be a record length of time to have been at sea.
The site questioned whether the crew would have been adequately equipped to spend such a long time underwater, given that a previous shorter patrol saw submariners on near-starvation rations.
(Image: Simon Dawson/No 10 Downing Street)
The Sun reported last year that crew on a Vanguard-class submarine which was on patrol for more than six months had been reduced to hunting for leftover food, divvying up sweets and crisps – with medics fearing 'serious loss of life' as a result of hunger-induced fatigue.
Restocking at sea would mean coming up for air, according to Navy Lookout, which would defeat the aim of nuclear patrols operating 'undetected'.
There are growing concerns about the state of Britain's nuclear fleet, which insiders have said is falling apart at the seams.
READ MORE:
Dominic Cummings, former top aide to Boris Johnson, has said that the Trident programme is 'f***ed' and claimed that the extent of its pressure on the wider military budget was kept highly classified to avoid MPs thinking about it'.
Efforts are underway to build new nuclear submarines, which will be the new Dreadnought-class of submarines replacing the four Vanguard-class vessels which have been operating since 1992.
After months of silent service, Royal Navy submariners running a nuclear deterrent patrol have returned to UK waters. It was an honour to join them on board, and to meet their loved ones. Thank you for your service to our country — welcome home. pic.twitter.com/UoJyTQSYrG
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) March 20, 2025
The old vessels were only intended to be in service for 25 years, meaning the newest of the lot should have retired last year and the oldest in 2018.
The new Dreadnought-class submarines are intended to enter service in the 'early 2030s', according to the Ministry of Defence and will have a lifespan of 'at least 30 years'.
There are also concerns about whether the Vanguard-class submarines are even capable of firing nuclear missiles – after two high-profile failures in early 2024.
The Ministry of Defence was approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Government struggles to cut foreign aid spent on asylum hotels
The government is struggling to cut the amount of foreign aid it spends on hotel bills for asylum seekers in the UK, the BBC has learnt. New figures released quietly by ministers in recent days show the Home Office plans to spend £2.2bn of overseas development assistance (ODA) this financial year - that is only marginally less than the £2.3bn it spent in 2024/25. The money is largely used to cover the accommodation costs of thousands of asylum seekers who have recently arrived in the UK. The Home Office said it was committed to ending asylum hotels and was speeding up asylum decisions to save taxpayers' money. The figures were published on the Home Office website with no accompanying notification to media. Foreign aid is supposed to be spent alleviating poverty by providing humanitarian and development assistance overseas. But under international rules, governments can spend some of their foreign aid budgets at home to support asylum seekers during the first year after their arrival. According to the most recent Home Office figures, there are about 32,000 asylum seekers in hotels in the UK. Labour promised in its manifesto to "end asylum hotels, saving the taxpayer billions of pounds". Contracts signed by the Conservative government in 2019 were expected to see £4.5bn of public cash paid to three companies to accommodate asylum seekers over a 10-year period. But a report by spending watchdog the National Audit Office (NAO) in May said that number was expected to be £15.3bn. Asylum accommodation costs set to triple, says watchdog Asylum hotel companies vow to hand back some profits On June 3, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told the Home Affairs Committee she was "concerned about the level of money" being spent on asylum seekers' accommodation and added: "We need to end asylum hotels altogether." The Home Office said it was trying to bear down on the numbers by reducing the time asylum seekers can appeal against decisions. It is also planning to introduce tighter financial eligibility checks to ensure only those without means are housed. But Whitehall officials and international charities have said the Home Office has no incentive to reduce ODA spending because the money does not come out of its budgets. The scale of government aid spending on asylum hotels has meant huge cuts in UK support for humanitarian and development priorities across the world. Those cuts have been exacerbated by the government's reductions to the overall ODA budget. In February, Sir Keir Starmer said he would cut aid spending from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% by 2027 - a fall in absolute terms of about £14bn to some £9bn. Such was the scale of aid spending on asylum hotels in recent years that the previous Conservative government gave the Foreign Office an extra £2bn to shore up its humanitarian commitments overseas. But Labour has refused to match that commitment. Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at the Bond network of development organisations, said: "Cutting the UK aid budget while using it to prop up Home Office costs is a reckless repeat of decisions taken by the previous Conservative government. "Diverting £2.2bn of UK aid to cover asylum accommodation in the UK is unsustainable, poor value for money, and comes at the expense of vital development and humanitarian programmes tackling the root causes of poverty, conflict and displacement. "It is essential that we support refugees and asylum seekers in the UK, but the government should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul." Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said the government was introducing "savage cuts" to its ODA spending, risking the UK's development priorities and international reputation, while "Home Office raids on the aid budget" had barely reduced. "Aid is meant to help the poorest and most vulnerable across the world: to alleviate poverty, improve life chances and reduce the risk of conflict," she said. "Allowing the Home Office to spend it in the UK makes this task even harder." "The government must get a grip on spending aid in the UK," she said. "The Spending Review needs to finally draw a line under this perverse use of taxpayer money designed to keep everyone safe and prosperous in their own homes, not funding inappropriate, expensive accommodation here." Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: "Labour promised in their manifesto to end the use of asylum hotels for illegal immigrants. But the truth is there are now thousands more illegal migrants being housed in hotels under Labour. "Now these documents reveal that Labour are using foreign aid to pay for asylum hotel accommodation – yet another promise broken." A Home Office spokesperson said: "We inherited an asylum system under exceptional pressure, and continue to take action, restoring order, and reduce costs. This will ultimately reduce the amount of Official Development Assistance spent to support asylum seekers and refugees in the UK. "We are immediately speeding up decisions and increasing returns so that we can end the use of hotels and save the taxpayer £4bn by 2026." Is the government meeting its pledges on illegal immigration and asylum?
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Pentagon keeps sending destroyers that fought in the Red Sea to the US southern border — a fourth one is on its way
The Defense Department is sending another destroyer, USS Cole, to the southern border mission. Cole is the latest destroyer to go from the Red Sea conflict to America's backyard. The warship is one of the many military assets the White House has sent to the US-Mexico border. A fourth US Navy destroyer that participated in the Red Sea conflict is on its way to support President Donald Trump's southern border mission, bringing a range of advanced naval combat capabilities to a very different operating environment. The Navy announced Friday that the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Cole had left its homeport in Florida to support US Northern Command's "border security objectives." The Trump administration has made cracking down on maritime-related criminal activity, including weapons smuggling, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration, a top priority, and the Defense Department has sent military assets to the US-Mexico border. Among these assets are five destroyers and a littoral combat ship on staggered deployments. Cole, like the other warships, is set to be accompanied by a US Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment. They specialize in military operations at sea, such as counterterrorism, counterpiracy, and anti-immigration missions. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers like the Cole are advanced naval surface ships with robust communications and sensor suites and are suited for long-endurance missions. These vessels can be armed with surface-to-air and land-attack missiles. Other armaments include the ship's five-inch deck gun, machine guns, and a Phalanx Close-In Weapons System. The Navy said that the Cole's deployment to the southern border "aims to enhance maritime security and support interagency collaboration in the region through presence operations" and the support of the Coast Guard operators, who can perform vessel boardings, searches, and seizures to target drug trafficking, illegal immigration, and maritime criminal activity. Cole's new assignment makes it the latest destroyer to go from the Red Sea conflict, where it defended international shipping lanes from attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels, to patrolling the waters near the US-Mexico border. It follows in the footsteps of USS Gravely, USS Stockdale, and USS Spruance, which all had extensive Middle East deployments last year. When the Cole arrives in the Gulf of Mexico, which the Trump administration has renamed the Gulf of America, it will be one of two destroyers actively participating in the mission. The other warship, USS Sampson, departed its homeport in San Diego a few days ago and will be operating in the Pacific Ocean. Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
11 hours ago
- Business Insider
Trump's Pentagon keeps sending destroyers that fought in the Red Sea to the US southern border — a fourth one is on its way
A fourth US Navy destroyer that participated in the Red Sea conflict is on its way to support President Donald Trump's southern border mission, bringing a range of advanced naval combat capabilities to a very different operating environment. The Navy announced Friday that the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Cole had left its homeport in Florida to support US Northern Command's "border security objectives." The Trump administration has made cracking down on maritime-related criminal activity, including weapons smuggling, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration, a top priority, and the Defense Department has sent military assets to the US-Mexico border. Among these assets are five destroyers and a littoral combat ship on staggered deployments. Cole, like the other warships, is set to be accompanied by a US Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment. They specialize in military operations at sea, such as counterterrorism, counterpiracy, and anti-immigration missions. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers like the Cole are advanced naval surface ships with robust communications and sensor suites and are suited for long-endurance missions. These vessels can be armed with surface-to-air and land-attack missiles. Other armaments include the ship's five-inch deck gun, machine guns, and a Phalanx Close-In Weapons System. The Navy said that the Cole's deployment to the southern border "aims to enhance maritime security and support interagency collaboration in the region through presence operations" and the support of the Coast Guard operators, who can perform vessel boardings, searches, and seizures to target drug trafficking, illegal immigration, and maritime criminal activity. Cole's new assignment makes it the latest destroyer to go from the Red Sea conflict, where it defended international shipping lanes from attacks by Iran-backed Houthi rebels, to patrolling the waters near the US-Mexico border. It follows in the footsteps of USS Gravely, USS Stockdale, and USS Spruance, which all had extensive Middle East deployments last year. When the Cole arrives in the Gulf of Mexico, which the Trump administration has renamed the Gulf of America, it will be one of two destroyers actively participating in the mission. The other warship, USS Sampson, departed its homeport in San Diego a few days ago and will be operating in the Pacific Ocean.
