The Government’s credibility deficit on Defence spending

25th May, 2012 2:26 pm

With a humiliating u-turn on the aircraft carrier programme completed, Philip Hammond took the brave step of claiming the Defence budget is balanced over the next ten years.  The triumphalism was predictably cheered on his own benches.  His problem, however, is that not even they are convinced, since ministers’ mistakes have eroded confidence in their handling of defence.

Let’s remember the time-consuming and expensive aircraft carrier debacle. Ministers have reverted to purchasing the fast jets earmarked by the previous Labour Government after deriding our plans as a ‘mistake’. Hammond’s sole argument is that the facts have changed, but in truth he has changed his mind after examining the facts.

The Public Accounts Committee warned of the rising cost of the Government’s policy. The National Audit Office warned that the Government had an ‘immature understanding’ of costs.  The Defence Select Committee warned against strategic shrinkage. Ministers failed to heed these multiple warnings.

It was the Prime Minister himself who referred to the previous Labour Government’s decision as an ‘error’.  This certainly wasn’t the first time that he over-reached himself. His claim that the rushed defence review would allow Britain to maintain ‘full-spectrum capability’ was subsequently derided by the Defence Select Committee.

Incompetence and hubris characterise the Government’s carrier policy, and still we don’t know how much this u-turn has squandered. At various points, the MoD has claimed the cost to be £37 million, £50 million and £100 million. Other estimates have put the cost as high as £258 million. British taxpayers and the men and women of our Armed Forces deserve better. In hard times such as these, it is absolutely essential the Government publish the exact total in full.

This shambles is compounded by the needless scrapping of the Harrier fleet in the defence review. They were sold to the Americans for a fraction of their value, shedding essential skills and expertise which will now need to be replaced. This decision also means that Britain, a proud maritime nation, will be without aircraft on our aircraft carriers—an important capability gap—for a decade. You don’t have to be an expert military strategist to understand that if our aircraft carriers have no aircraft on them, then something has gone seriously wrong.

Government ministers have nobody to blame but themselves. The Prime Minister’s decisions have cost British time, money, talent and prestige and he must accept responsibility for this.

The biggest political cost to the Government, however, will be that it is no longer trusted on Defence. The carrier u-turn is not just another chapter in the ongoing ‘omnishambles’, but will also mark a watershed in the public’s trust in the Government’s handling of Defence policy.

It is no wonder, then, that the reaction to the Defence Secretary’s claim to have balanced the budget was to reach for the bucket of salt. He is repeating what his predecessor claimed, only before he was forced to admit he got his figures wrong and announce another wave of Army cuts. We will judge this not on these reheated claims but on the detail.

Already many questions abound. These plans are built on the assumption of a 1% rise in equipment spending over the next ten years which is not guaranteed.  They only refer to the Defence Equipment budget, which is 45% of the overall MoD budget, leaving 55% of an annual £35bn budget unaccounted for a decade. The statement was also based on the claim that Ministers have overcome the problems of cost and time over-runs on equipment programmes despite failing to make any meaningful reforms to defence procurement.  The Defence Secretary has said he will publish the full equipment programme to prove his claims, but cannot say when; he boasts about a plan for transparency that remains hidden.

Moreover, the Defence Secretary has based his actions—which include 30,000 redundancies, cuts to frontline allowances and cuts to equipment—on his claim the Government inherited a £38 billion budget deficit.  The Defence Select Committee, the National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee and Professor Malcolm Chalmers have all described this as unverifiable. The Government has yet to publish how it arrived at this figure, and until it does, cannot credibly claim a sound grasp on the Ministry of Defence budget.

People are routinely asked to take the Government’s word that its figures are correct, but following ministers’ chaotic handling of the strategically vital aircraft carrier programme it is not surprising many are so sceptical. With this Government’s creditability on Defence at a new low we will need to see hard, un-spun figures before we are convinced of the merits of Philip Hammond’s claims.

  • Pingback: The Government’s credibility deficit on Defence spending | Labour Friends of the Forces()

  • Bill Lockhart

    Labour’s combination of malicious negligence and abject incompetence on Defence when in government pretty much disqualifies them from pontificating on the subject for the next ten year or so.

  • treborc1

    We all know the Mod and the aircraft carriers, the helicopters which laid up for3 years because we did not have the means of running the aircraft due in part to different computers systems to also not having the trained pilots, to going to war without the correct equipment to people dying because they had to return body Armour.

    The simple fact of this our harriers would have been able to have done the tasks, but nope we had to buy American, I suspect new labour did deals and the Tories have  done more deals.

    Lets hope somebody has a brain wave about our Military because when politicians make mistakes people die

Latest

  • News Unite make clear they do not support de-selecting MPs

    Unite make clear they do not support de-selecting MPs

    This evening Channel 4 have run a story stating that a Unite member is claiming that the “far-left” is preparing to try and de-select Labour MPs if Jeremy Corbyn wins. Unite have stressed that this is not their policy, while leadership contender Corbyn does not seem to have any part in this. The unnamed Unite member is reported to have named a number of MPs he would wish to de-select. However, this is in no way supported by Unite and […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Will Chuka Umunna be the next Shadow Chancellor?

    Will Chuka Umunna be the next Shadow Chancellor?

    From being touted as leader of the resistance against Jeremy Corbyn, Chuka Umunna is now being tipped as being the left winger’s number two. With the betting markets still convinced that victory for Jeremy Corbyn is assured, Umunna’s odds for becoming the next Shadow Chancellor tumbled this morning. He is now second favourite for the role, just behind Andy Burnham, at 5/1. Umunna appears to have publicly softened his position on leadership frontrunner Corbyn. It is no great secret that Campaign Group […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Dissolution Dishonour: it’s time to abolish the House of Lords

    Dissolution Dishonour: it’s time to abolish the House of Lords

    The Prime Minister’s behaviour since his unexpected election victory shames our democracy. His dodgy dissolution honours list is only the latest and most egregious example of his contempt for all constitutional and political propriety. As always his actions are extremely partisan in the Tory party cause. His utter failure to ensure that the electoral register contains the up to seven million missing voters who are far less likely to be Tories, his decision to cut the number of seats in […]

    Read more →
  • News Kendall calls for early years inequality to be tackled

    Kendall calls for early years inequality to be tackled

    Liz Kendall has called for a greater effort in tackling the inequalities that set in before children start school. This morning, the leadership hopeful said that as much effort should be put into tackling inequality during foundation years as it is at primary and secondary school. Kendall said that she has seen first hand in her own Leicester West constituency how children could start school at the age of five over a year behind their peers in terms of development. […]

    Read more →
  • News Jeremy Corbyn proposes plan for older people with flexible pension age

    Jeremy Corbyn proposes plan for older people with flexible pension age

    Jeremy Corbyn has outlined part of his plan for older people with a flexible pension age. Writing in the Telegraph (£) the leadership candidate argues against increasing the pension wage and cutting social care provision and instead proposes a flexible pension age “that allows people to work for as long as they want to”. He notes that raising the pension age mostly affects lower-paid workers. Corbyn suggests that these measures would be paid for by increasing income tax rates – […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit