What’s going on at the MoD?

February 5, 2013 10:56 am

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

On Tuesday evening last week David Cameron said he wanted to ring-fence the entire defence budget from 2015. By Wednesday morning Philip Hammond was desperately ‘clarifying’ that the only portion of the budget for which any guarantee could be made was the equipment element, which is less than 40% of the total. What Ministers did not tell you was that on the same day the National Audit Office released a report on defence equipment which said the Government’s guarantees will only be affordable if non-equipment spending is cut, which means more likely reductions in welfare, housing and personnel.

The significance of last week’s governmental incompetence is twofold. First, as part of his apprenticeship for the job in government he has had his eye on for almost a decade – Chancellor – Philip Hammond is desperately trying to build a reputation on ‘balancing the books’, but the NAO report exposed the fact he is failing to do so. Second, the Prime Minister is unaware of his own defence spending policy, which not just accounts for £34bn of taxpayer pounds but goes to the heart of our ability to achieve our ambitions in the world and protect our service personnel.

Many will think will take some beating as an example of government shambles – or as one wag has called it #bombnishambles, or #armygeddon – but there is a ready-made contender. A Defence Select Committee report is published today which revisits the flawed 2010 Defence Review and the Government’s decision to change the planes that fly from our future aircraft carriers. Out went the vertical take off and land variant, which Labour had planned to introduce, to be replaced by the ‘cats and traps’ variant of the Joint Strike Fighter. Standing at the Dispatch Box in 2010 David Cameron announced his plans to reverse Labour’s  policy, scrap all the Harriers, which left us without aircraft to fly from carriers for a decade, sell Ark Royal, build two carriers but mothball one and sack trainee pilots.

Soon the plan began to unravel and, just weeks in to the job, Philip Hammond had the humiliation of performing a u-turn and returning to Labour’s original plans. Their u-turn only came full circle after an embarrassment of errors. They said their policy was cheaper – but it was more expensive by up to £2bn more than planned. They said the UK would be interoperable with the French – but their chosen jet couldn’t even land on the French carrier. The Prime Minister personally derided a policy he has now adopted.

Ministers scrapped the Harrier Jump jet fleet, but the irony now is that the Government are in fact buying a new fleet of jump jets, meaning we will need to retrain and redevelop the skills carelessly cast aside. It is as incoherent as it is ludicrous.

The Select Committee has now concluded that the ‘decision was rushed and based upon incomplete and inaccurate policy development…This decision ultimately led to increased costs to the carrier strike programme and a delay in the in-service date of the carrier.’ The report shows that the decision has cost the taxpayer £100m, and seems set to rise still further.

This all comes as there are rising concerns across the Government’s defence planning.  There are real worries over proposals to increase the number of Reservists to plug the capability gaps left by deep cuts in the fulltime Army. For our nation’s sake we need that policy to succeed but there is as yet no government offer to incentivise employers, who are understandably concerned about losing employees for longer periods of Reservists service. The Government are also now considering cutting those who support our Special Forces at a time when they are needed to help deal with al Qaeda.  Meanwhile the ‘bedroom tax’ could hit Forces families while their loved ones train or serve overseas and changes to public sector pensions have failed to give defence fire and police services the same exemptions in the rising retirement age as their civilian counterparts.  This all shows a set of Ministers either not on top of the detail or inconsiderate of their people’s needs.

At a time when our Forces are being asked to do more overseas in new contexts they are being given less frontline resource, cuts in welfare support and limited strategic guidance. New and complex challenges collide with fiscal realities to make tough decisions and trade-offs necessary, but this must be underpinned by direction, sound financing and a compassion that drives a determination to do the utmost by those who serve and their families.  The last few weeks have shown us that the Government demonstrates none of these qualities. Incompetence is corrosive when it comes to the government’s policy on defence.  They can’t go on like this.

Jim Murphy is the Shadow Secretary of State for Defence

  • Pingback: What’s going on at the MoD? | Labour Friends of the Forces()

  • http://www.facebook.com/ptanto Paul Tanto

    Delivering two aircraft carriers without planes to fly from them does, indeed, take a staggering lack of competence / attention to detail.

  • uglyfatbloke

    Just the next step in the sad tale of British defence policy since god knows when. is there a competition between the two parties to see who can do the most stupid things while sucking up to major military suppliers? The carrier programme was pretty silly in the first place and the Tories have made it even more so, but Labour has nothing to boast about here…Trident? The tank replacement programme? What next ? A new bow-and -arrow factory?
    Billions spent on kit that does n’t work and pointless operations, but we can’t pay a decent wage to our service personnel, OTH we can somehow afford more admirals than we have ships, more generals that we have battalions and – so i’ m told – more Air marshals than we have squadrons and there is no control over the revolving door arrangements of senior officers joining defence corporations as soon as they leave the service.
    So that’s great……

Latest

  • Comment Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    Future Jobs of Britain: Ensuring everyone has a stake

    We believe a Britain where everyone can do well for themselves and achieve their aspirations – where the next generation does better than the last – is the right vision for Britain.  We can only realise this goal if we build an economy which raises living standards for all working people, not just a few at the top. We certainly haven’t seen this under a Tory led Government, but we are clear that this is the destination of the next […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour announce they’ll break “the stranglehold” big private bus operators have over services

    Labour have announced that they would stop five companies from dominating the bus service market, by making it easier for not-for-profit operators to run services. At the moment, Stagecoach, Arriva, Go-Ahead, First Group and National Express control 72% of local bus services. It’s said, Labour are looking at groups such as Hackney Community Transport – a social enterprise that provides transport to London and certain areas of Yorkshire. Founded in 1982, the company has no shareholders and looks to invest […]

    Read more →
  • Comment ‘I would have been angry too’

    ‘I would have been angry too’

    Labour needs to learn to let go, says Jim McMahon in exclusive interview with Liz Kendall and Steve Reed for their new pamphlet with Progress ‘If we had gone into marriage guidance counselling at that point,’ says Jim McMahon of the relationship between Oldham council and its residents two years ago, ‘the counsellor might have said: “Do you know what, it might just be time to part ways”.’ Oldham was not, says the man who has led it since May […]

    Read more →
  • News Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    Majority of LabourList readers agree with statement from left-wing MPs

    At the start of this week, 15 MPs issued a statement calling for an alternative to Labour’s current deficit reduction plans, a policy that would see the railways returned to public ownership and a more robust collective bargaining powers for workers, including better employment rights in the workplace. These proposals are not Labour policy and it’s unlikely that they will be before the election (or at least the first two won’t make it into the manifesto). But what do LabourList […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour’s NHS plans should reflect real life not vague values

    Labour’s NHS plans should reflect real life not vague values

    ‘The frequency of talk about values is matched by a corresponding vagueness of the concept’ a famous German philosopher once wrote. In the run-up to the election, Labour is in danger of speaking with a tone of vague passion when talking about the NHS. We insist we’re the only party that can save this cherished institution, but sound unclear and woolly when interviewers ask what that means in practice. The polls aren’t necessarily on our side. Yes, the public think […]

    Read more →