Latest news with #AJAX
The National
14 hours ago
- Politics
- The National
Defence review dodges Britain's nuclear blind spot
Presented as a roadmap to 'Make Britain Safer', the review promised clarity and accountability, but it fails to confront the most pressing truths: that the UK's nuclear programme is financially unsustainable, strategically unbalanced, increasingly unaccountable and a real and present danger to us all. These concerns are not hypothetical. In the final months of the last Parliament, I raised them on the floor of the House of Commons, not out of party dogma, but in response to serious and public allegations from Dominic Cummings, former chief adviser to the then prime minister, remember him? He described Britain's nuclear infrastructure as a 'dangerous disaster', responsible for the secret 'cannibalisation' of other national security budgets and shielded from meaningful scrutiny. READ MORE: UK won't recognise Palestine at UN conference despite 'discussions', reports say Whatever one thinks of Cummings or the nuclear deterrent, the substance of these allegations is disturbingly familiar. The National Audit Office (NAO) has echoed similar concerns, reporting a projected defence funding gap of up to £29.8 billion, with nuclear and Royal Navy costs rising the most sharply. These are not partisan claims, they're structural failures. That day in the Commons, the then-shadow defence secretary, now the Secretary of State, was present to hear them and now in government, he has chosen not to challenge or investigate them, he's just sidestepped them entirely. Nuclear ringfencing: A cost we refuse to count The UK Defence Review reaffirms the nuclear deterrent as the UK's 'top defence priority' and explicitly commits to protecting its funding through ringfencing, yet it offers no detailed breakdown of those costs and barely acknowledges the impact this has on the rest of the armed forces. At one point, the review admits that nuclear spending 'might have forced savings in essential capabilities' – a remarkable understatement. Behind this phrase lies a wider truth: that the UK's defence strategy is being skewed by a deterrent whose costs are rising beyond control, shielded from accountability by MOD political taboo. There is no analysis in the review of how ringfencing distorts capability development, procurement planning or readiness in the conventional forces. In a document designed to show how Britain will 'balance' risk and resilience, this omission is fatal. Procurement dysfunction: Recognised, and untouched The review admits what every oversight body has said for years: defence procurement is broken. Projects are delayed, over budget and misaligned with modern threats. Yet beyond nodding at the problem, the review offers no structural reform. Cummings alleged that the MOD continued to fund 'legacy disasters' while gutting new capabilities. Those criticisms align with a long history of NAO reports, whether on AJAX, Type 26 delays or wider programme mismanagement. The review responds with little more than the promise of procurement 'measured in months, not years'. READ MORE: 'Joy, celebration and warmth' of Palestinian art to be showcased at Edinburgh Fringe Unsurprisingly, there's no serious roadmap, no new governance model, no mechanism to hold decision-makers in the MOD accountable and without these, the same dysfunction will continue to waste billions, no matter how polished the strategic language. Where is the democratic oversight? Perhaps most worrying is the review's treatment of oversight. Cummings claimed that key decisions about the UK's nuclear strategy were made through 'secret tunnel' processes that excluded even senior ministers. If true, this undermines the core principles of democratic governance of departments. The review's answer is to propose that a new National Security Council (Nuclear), a closed ministerial subcommittee, should meet twice a year to review progress; that is not oversight, it's entrenchment. There's a passing reference to potential 'enhanced parliamentary scrutiny under appropriate conditions' with no clarity on what that actually means, or how it would be applied, and no mention of expanding the role of Select Committees or publishing clearer data for Parliament as many nuclear Nato allies do. For an area of defence with the greatest cost and risk, the lack of democratic scrutiny is glaring and frankly a dereliction of duty. A missed opportunity Labour's Strategic Defence Review 2025 had a rare opportunity to correct course by managing it more transparently, more accountably and with greater strategic realism. Even those of us opposed to the nuclear enterprise in its entirety couldn't and shouldn't oppose increased scrutiny. That opportunity has been missed. READ MORE: Freedom Flotilla urges UK Government to 'protect' ship from Israel as it nears Gaza Instead of confronting the truth, the review restates familiar platitudes and leaves the public and Parliament no wiser about the scale cost, or consequences of the UK's nuclear commitment. The Defence Secretary, who heard these warnings first-hand from the opposition bench, is now in a position to act – he has chosen not to. So, the central questions remain for the UK Government: What is being done to stop the nuclear enterprise from distorting the wider defence budget? What safeguards ensure genuine democratic oversight of the UK's most dangerous and expensive defence programme? Until these are answered, Britain's defence policy will remain unbalanced, unaffordable, alarmingly unaccountable and a real and present danger to us all.
BBC News
27-02-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Extra defence cash could be spent in Wales
Wales could benefit from plans to boost the UK's spending on defence, a treasury minister has Minister Sir Keir Starmer said he would boost military budgets to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, funded by cuts to foreign a visit to Airbus, in Newport, Darren Jones said it was a "great opportunity for the UK economy, including here in Wales".Finance Secretary for Wales, Mark Drakeford, said he expects a "share" of the extra cash to be spent in the country. More than 160 companies supporting the defence sector have operations based in Wales, employing over 20,000 include BAE Systems, which has a munitions facility in Monmouthshire, and General Dynamics, which is constructing its AJAX armoured vehicles in Merthyr Thursday Jones and Drakeford visited Airbus's complex on the outskirts of Newport, which provides security systems for the Ministry of Defence and other private treasury minister is on a tour of the UK ahead of the spending review - a major announcement which will set out how the government allocates cash for public if Wales could benefit from the defence announcement the chief secretary to the Treasury, told BBC Wales: "Yes."Potentially we are spending more money on defence companies and defence technologies, which is a great opportunity for the UK economy, including here in Wales."He said there would be "plenty" of opportunities for businesses and workers at firms including Airbus."We've got the strategic defence review happening at the moment, the spending review will be concluded in June. Once we've done all of that, decided the strategy and the budget we will then just be getting on with spending that money." Drakeford said: "Wales already makes a larger proportionate contribution to other parts of the UK to our armed forces. "We would certainly be able to see Wales get its share of a very important additional investment."Asked how he felt about the cuts to international aid to fund the military, the former first minister added: "There are some very difficult decisions."The world is changing around us and not changing in a way where it is easy to see how the pieces will all eventually fall."He said Sir Keir faced a "difficult balancing act". The visit came ahead of meeting between Jones, Drakeford and finance ministers from Scotland and Northern Ireland. On wider UK government spending, Drakeford said he did not find it "frustrating" that there was divergence between the two Labour-run include High Speed 2 rail, which the Welsh government says should generate a financial benefit for Wales, and on the devolution of the Crown Estate."I think it is natural and normal," said Drakeford. "The responsibility for the Welsh government is to speak up for the things we know to be important here in Wales."Drakeford said the Welsh government continues "to have very productive discussions" on rail, where there is hope the UK government will invest in new said he did not want to be "relitigating the arguments of a past Conservative government".But he said there was a "shared ambition" over rail investment.
