Estimates of the one-0ff costs of replacing Trident range around £20bn. Add that to an assumed annual running cost of £2bn and some updates you reach a total of around £80Bn over 30 years - about £2.5Bn a year. Assume an alternate deterrent would save around 40%, that's a saving of £1Bn a year at great technical risk of obsolescence and reduction in capability. And, please, don't insult my intelligence by suggestion such a saving will be "ring fenced" for defence.
In the meantime wee are due to spend around £200bn this year on welfare, if you lump state pensions and benefits together; and another $11Bn
in foreign aid.
So we take all those risks for such a small saving? Why?