THE SNP insists a Royal navy chief has "blown a hole" in what it regards as a Westminster committee's wild scaremongering after he said the UK Government could place warship orders with the Clyde shipyards in an independent Scotland.
Until now, Coalition ministers and Whitehall sources have made clear Scotland would lose out on future Ministry of Defence orders if Scots voted to break away from the UK.
The Nationalists argue the quality of workmanship on the Clyde would mean such orders would be secured in an independent Scotland.
Philip Dunne, the Minister for Defence Equipment, told the Commons Scottish Affairs Committee: "We have never placed an order for a warship, other than in times of world wars, outside the United Kingdom. It is not our intent to do so with the Type 26."
Asked by Labour's Ian Davidson, the committee chairman, if Scots voted for independence where would that leave the Type 26 order, Mr Dunne replied: "You raise an interesting hypothetical."
He added: "The future would be more uncertain for all those businesses in Scotland which rely upon UK MoD spend, because we cannot be assured that the security considerations wouldn't lead to some of those decisions to place work in Scotland... would be less certain."
However, Vice-Admiral Andrew Mathews, Chief of Materiel Fleet, asked if the frigates could be built on the Clyde if Scotland was outside the UK, replied: "That's absolutely the case, it depends on the outcome of the referendum and the timing of the 26 order... That is one of the options open to us."
Angus Robertson, the SNP's defence spokesman, said the comments "rightly undermined some of the wilder scaremongering that anti-independence politicians have engaged in".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article