Astute before launchThe SNP are an anti-nuclear party, we’re always told. For instance, they’re notionally against civilian nuclear, although Jim Mather was happy in the last session to back an extension of their life in the last session. And opposition to Trident is billed as almost their second touchstone of policy, after the Holy Grail itself. In fact, some have told me that independence is primarily essential because there’s no other way to get Trident out of Scotland’s waters.

So what about nuclear-powered submarines? The Navy’s Clyde base is now expected to be home to 11 of the new reactor-tastic Astute class of sub, up from 5. As Rob Edwards reports today, the safety risks from these subs are growing as the cuts bite. Surely the SNP would be against this move?

In fact, their submission (word doc) to the UK Government’s defence review states “The decision to base the UK Astute class submarines at HMNB Clyde is a welcome one and is likely to see a significant increase in the number of personnel based there. The Scottish Government remains committed to supporting this through consideration of devolved consequences and a partnership approach to planning for example in terms of health and education.”

Seriously? This is about jobs? Each boat has less than a hundred crew, and supposedly costs around £1.3bn, but if you don’t think there are many more hidden costs there I expect you also believe the final cost of an additional Forth road bridge will be just £1.6bn. That’s a job creation scheme? We could have insulated every single home in Scotland for less money than one of these white elephants.

What’s worse, although they’re currently only holding conventional weapons, Lee Willett at the Royal United Services Institute thinks Astute might be the British military’s fallback Trident launch platform of choice. As he puts it, “Thus, it is reasonable to assume that Astute is big enough to carry strategic weapons if required, with the only changes to the hull coming in the form of the modular payloads. Perhaps Astute was designed with this eventuality in mind?“ Either way, SNP Ministers are laying out the welcome mat and apparently not asking any questions.

Obviously you’d expect a Green comment, as the only other anti-nuclear party at Holyrood, and here’s what Patrick had to say:

“The majority of anti-nuclear and anti-war Scots will be shocked to discover that the SNP are making the case on the quiet for more nuclear submarines to come to the Clyde, despite years of posturing in the opposite direction. SNP Ministers are yet again pretending you can have your cake while also eating it, just as they have done on RAF bases. There’s no credible way to combine a nuclear unionism – for the supposed jobs – with an anti-war nationalism designed to keep the activists happy. The truth is that nuclear submarines are exactly as inefficient at creating jobs as they are for defending Scotland, and it’s time the SNP started speaking with one voice on this issue.”

But more alarming for SNP Ministers will be the way the charge against their position has been led by one of their own – Stephen Maxwell, a former vice-chair of the SNP, who Rob quotes as saying: “On its current direction of evolution, SNP’s defence policy threatens to match the level of incoherence already evident in UK policy”, and that his own party’s policy “is clearly inconsistent with its declared policy of making Scotland nuclear-free” and “seriously compromising” the case for independence. That’s despite the official quote in Rob’s story again making that case – that independence is partly about a nuclear-free Scotland.

I bet there’ll be others at Holyrood thinking the same thing, even if most backbenchers are still afraid to speak out against the leadership. The joke is unavoidable – Alex Salmond’s got where he is today with some astute decision-making, but this looks anything but.