QUESTIONS were raised last night over the credibility of David Laws carrying out a review of the possible alternatives to Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent, given that he is a "part-time Education Minister" who is not based at the Ministry of Defence.
Thomas Docherty, the Labour MP for Dunfermline and West Fife, who sits on the Commons Defence Committee, asked what access Mr Laws would have to sensitive defence information, necessary to take an informed view of the alternatives to Trident.
"Will he be a member of the National Security Committee? Does he have MoD security clearance? Will he have access to civil servant support? What access will he have to the Chief of the Defence Staff and other heads of the services?" asked the backbencher, who is to table a number of parliamentary questions.
Mr Docherty told The Herald: "For two years, the Liberal Democrats have championed this review as a serious, thoughtful and credible piece of work. Having sacked a well-regarded defence minister in Nick Harvey, this review has been handed to a part-time Education Minister.
"It raises serious questions about how much taxpayers' money will be spent on a political sop to the Liberal Democrats."
The review of alternatives to Trident is part of the Coalition Agreement and was being undertaken by LibDem Sir Nick, who, until this month's reshuffle, was the armed forces minister.
He himself has raised concerns about whether his colleague, working out of the Education Department and the Cabinet Office, would have sufficient time to devote to the Trident review.
"He is a very able man, he has got a very empirical mind but I hope that that isn't going to suffer from having somebody not actually on the case," he said.
A LibDem party spokesman dismissed concerns over Mr Laws's ability to undertake the review, saying: "He will be able to carry out the review very effectively."
Mr Laws is expected to complete the review early next year.
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