We’ve got it the wrong way round - by concentrating on a problem that probably won’t happen we almost completely ignore one that without doubt will have a massive impact on the lives of all of you under the age of 60.

Every year the UK spends large sums of money on the armed services to be ready to protect us citizens - around £800 each, some £50 billion annually. It’s about half the amount we spend on the NHS, which serves 65 million people and employs one-and-a-half million, whereas there are fewer than 200,000 in all the various armed forces.

Additionally some of the equipment, in the air and at sea, is shockingly expensive. Our two new aircraft carriers will cost £13 billion plus, over £200 from every adult and child in the UK, and that’s before they set sail with a crew of 1,600.

Then they’ll be the most expensive status symbols ever as they’ll not be able to help deal with terrorism in any form even though they will have the most up to-date planes. We are also committed to buying 135 new American fighters, at a minimum cost of £10 billion, and again that’s before they've taken off.

It’s not possible to argue that the UK is only safe because of this investment as it’s higher than in most other countries because we are involved world wide following our colonial past and current association with the United States. National arrogance and a place at the top table come at a price.

Some 20 years ago commitment to reducing international CO2 levels was only agreed if countries could ignore their considerable military emissions so we need to be cautious about the reductions that they claim.

If we also add the uncounted emissions from over 100.000 civilian flights every day to those produced by the three armed forces we have a worrying explanation of why the world CO2 total continues to rise despite many countries seemingly producing less.

This autumn the CO2 level was 408 parts per million, last year it was 405.