The decision, noted in an earlier entry, of the UK government to give the go-ahead for the US to use Menwith Hill as a component in its missile defence system is generating a growing amount of disquiet and concern. The system as a whole is damaging international relations, is costly and doesn't seem to work very well. But more than that, in spite of the UK parliament's own defence committee criticising the government for the way in which it mishandled the earlier decision on Fylingdales, the current ministerial team seems to have learned from that only that it may be simpler (for them) to avoid consulting parliament at all. Now 20 or so MPs have signed a letter criticising this decision, and comment has come from CND (as well as a useful briefing from them) and BASIC , amongst others.
The latter commented:
'The decision in December 2002 to accede to a US upgrade at Fylingdales set a poor precedent in terms of process, transparency and accountability. The Defence Committee "strongly regretted the way in which the issue had been handled by the Government". This latest announcement is a further escalation in Britain's missile defence commitment without public debate or parliamentary scrutiny.'
MPs may be enjoying a recess from parliamentary duties, but perhaps this will give them more time to deal with correspondence from constituents on the matter. Can't find a pen and paper? Why not contact yours via WriteToThem.org.uk
