Britain's Trident nuclear weapons system has been given a strong vote of confidence by MPs after they backed renewing the deterrent.
The decisive result - by 472 votes to 117, majority 355 - was returned in support of a Government motion which also included backing the plan to replace the existing submarine fleet carrying the missiles with four new Successor submarines.
READ MORE: Poll - should Britain renew Trident?
Renewal of the continuous-at-sea deterrent is predicted to cost £31 billion, with a £10 billion contingency fund also set aside.
Labour MPs were subject to a free vote, with leader Jeremy Corbyn declaring he would oppose the motion - a stance which led to strong criticism from some of his backbenchers.
The SNP, the third largest party in the Commons with 54 MPs, also opposed the Government's plan.
A debate lasting almost six hours saw Theresa May, in her first despatch box appearance as Prime Minister, warn it would be a "reckless gamble" for the UK to rely on other nations for its nuclear deterrent.
She insisted it would be an "act of gross irresponsibility" should the Government discard the Trident weapons system, as she led calls to replace the submarine fleet which carries the missiles.
Mrs May also launched an attack on Jeremy Corbyn by claiming some Opposition frontbenchers appeared to be the first to "defend the country's enemies" and the last to accept what the UK needs to protect itself.
In his remarks, Mr Corbyn questioned if the "weapons of mass destruction" act as a credible deterrent to the threats faced by the UK.
He also warned the costs of renewal were "ballooning ever upwards" and noted that each warhead has the capacity to kill one million people.
Mr Corbyn added he would not take a decision that "kills millions of innocent people" - a nod to his stance that he would not authorise the use of nuclear weapons.
READ MORE: MPs back replacement of Trident but SNP warns it will speed up move to Scottish independence
The Labour leader and key allies, including shadow chancellor John McDonnell, were set to vote against the Government motion.
But Labour MP Toby Perkins, who last month resigned as shadow armed forces minister, compared Labour frontbench opposition to Trident with the arguments "of a 13-year-old".
Jamie Reed, Labour MP for Copeland, launched a blistering attack on his leadership's position and warned it could split the party.
He branded Mr Corbyn's opposition "juvenile" and "narcissistic" and said shadow cabinet members who voted against Trident should resign and return to the backbenches because they would be voting against Labour Party policy.
Mr Reed said: "I urge all colleagues on the Labour frontbench tonight to respect the democratic processes of the Labour Party, to respect the conference decision of the Labour Party, to vote with the established policy of the Labour Party.
"And if you can't do that, return to the backbenches."
Angus Robertson, the SNP's Westminster leader, warned that renewing Trident would speed up independence for Scotland.
He was applauded and cheered by his colleagues in the Commons after his speech, in which he labelled Trident as an "immoral, obscene and redundant weapons system".
Mr Robertson said: "If Scotland is a nation, and Scotland is a nation, it is not a normal situation for the state to totally disregard the wishes of the people, and this Government has a democratic deficit in Scotland, and with today's vote on Trident it's going to get worse, not better.
READ MORE: Poll - should Britain renew Trident?
"It will be for the Scottish people to determine whether we are properly protected in Europe and better represented by a Government that we actually elect - at this rate, that day is fast approaching."
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel