Dear Adrian Windisch,
I am writing to you to ask your views on the UK's Trident nuclear weapon system. I am particularly concerned because a decision on whether or not to replace Trident - at a cost of £100bn - is due in 2016 and successfully elected Members of Parliament will have to vote on this.
It is therefore important to me that you set out your views on Trident.
I believe that maintaining Trident is irrelevant to modern security threats; runs counter to our Non-Proliferation Treaty commitment to nuclear disarmament; and is not the best use of tax payers' money given the cuts deemed necessary in other areas of public spending.
In particular, before deciding how I will vote, I would like to know your views on the following four questions:
The UK's submarine-based Trident nuclear weapon system is approaching the end of its operational life. Do you think the UK should replace its nuclear weapon system?
The next government will conduct a Strategic Defence and Security Review. Do you think that should consider the possibilities and implications of scrapping and not replacing Trident?
The next government will need to attend the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in New York. Do you think it should support a nuclear weapons convention or ban, similar to those for chemical or biological weapons?
The next government will have to decide whether to carry out the current coalition government's projected austerity programme. Do you think spending £100 billion on Trident replacement can be justified?
I hope you can set out your responses, either in a simple yes or no form, or in greater depth if you have time.
I look forward to discussing this with you further on the campaign trail.Yours sincerely,