Preserve us from our friends

Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly missed the debate inside and outside Parliament on the decision to renew Trident.

I respect greatly the people who have argued this case from a point of principle, whatever their stance. I have slightly less for those who wanted to take the soft option to postpone a decision; very little at all for the opportunists who saw this as a stick with which to beat the Government.

The Cold War created the UK's nuclear deterrent and Trident's opponents argue the fundamental shift in power from the former Soviet Union to the US has made it redundant.

It's a tempting argument but one that fails to recognise the fragility of a world in which nuclear capability is now within the reach of many more states. It ignores totally the uncertainty of the future. Fifty years ago, few would have predicted that the Soviet Union would have imploded. None of us can predict where the balance of power will lie at the end of our own century. The only certainty is that our descendants will not be living in an ideal world.

There are still questions to be asked about Trident - its costing and testing for example - but surely the major question, its importance to our future security, has been settled.

There's one final issue too - what might be termed the "God preserve us from our friends" - factor. One of the main criticisms of our foreign policy is its subservience to the US. It would seem logical that giving up Trident would leave us further dependent on the good offices of Mr Bush and his advisors. That is something which I would imagine all parties would wish to avoid.

THE perks of the job are self-evident, but so are the perils of being Prince of Wales.

History is littered with examples of heirs apparent who found themselves at a loose end and made a thorough nuisance of themselves.

The future George IV, as anyone who has seen the excellent film The Madness of King George knows, spent his time in half-hearted intrigue with radical politicians. Edward VII devoted himself to dissipation, while his grandson, the walking disaster area known as Edward VIII, flirted with fascism and Mrs Simpson.

Now we have Prince Charles getting himself into hot water with public pronouncements on everything from hamburgers to homeopathic remedies, architecture to organic farming.

Politicians opposed to Charles portray him as a crank who talks to plants, dodges taxes and imperils the Constitution while hiding behind a wall of privilege. In fact, it is his enemies that are dodging the issues by refusing to argue with him head on.

I don't regard the Prince as a threat or, worse still, a fool. His views on the built and natural environment, health matters and housing strike a chord with many ordinary people. The Prince's Trust is an unequivocal success story providing practical support to thousands of young people.

The simple fact is that most contemporary public figures come straight off the production line. Surrounded by spin doctors, they dispense sound-bites with the speed and sincerity of automatons.

In these circumstances, it is small wonder that someone who is determined to think and speak for themselves should be branded an oddity. But all organisations need their awkward squad to challenge orthodoxies and swim against the tide. I hope the Prince continues to speak his interesting and original mind and annoy the politicians and pundits.