Trident costs 'could rise by 200m' pounds
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.TRIDENT missiles could cost Britain pounds 200m more than planned because the United States is building fewer in the wake of superpower arms cuts, according to new research. Any increased cost would add to the pressure on the 1993-94 UK defence budget.
If the cost increase resulting from the smaller order is not passed on, however, Britain could end up paying as little as half the cost of the last 20 or so missiles - an idea unlikely to appeal to Congress members desperately trying to cut US defence spending.
Yesterday the MoD denied the report, published by the British American Security Information Council (Basic), an independent research group, saying that it was 'satisfied any such change in the US plans will not have any significant impact on the cost of the UK missile programme'.
The global cost of the British Trident programme was estimated at pounds 10.676bn in January, so an extra pounds 200m is only 2 per cent of the total. But Dan Plesch, Basic's director, said yesterday: 'No one is claiming it's a major percentage increase but in this country, today, it's still a lot of money. The costs have obviously gone up and down, the exchange rate notwithstanding, but it's another 200 million quid, now.'
MoD sources said the missiles were bought on a 'fixed-price' basis, and the programme estimates accounted for such 'minor perturbations'. Basic's costs were artificial because missile construction facilities exist and the cost of maintaining them is divided by the number of missiles produced.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments