Military chiefs plan to ignore weapons ‘sell-by dates’ and reverse decades of safety first’ policy by keeping equipment and munitions in service for longer to fill gaps in UK supplies created by donations to Ukraine’s war effort
Armed Forces chiefs are ending decades of being overly ‘safety conscious’ with weapons supplies and keep them in service for longer to address shortages caused by the conflict in Ukraine, they revealed today.
Ministry of Defence officials and Army top brass said that they were willing to take more ‘risks’ than they have since the Cold War after the war against Russia left the UK with depleted stocks.
Concerns have been raised by Nato allies over British ammunition and equipment supplies after pledges to send materiel to Kyiv.
At a hearing today, Defence Committee chairman Tobias Ellwood raised concerns that weapons including Hellfire missiles, which are carried by British Army Apache helicopters, have different ‘sell-by dates depending where you are in Nato’.
‘That doesn’t make sense at all … that a Hellfire missile that we have has to be thrown away, dealt with, if it is not used, before an American missile of the same age.,’ he added.
Lieutenant General Robert Magowan, deputy chief of the Defence Staff, replied: ‘This is one of the key priorities for us, because it is not acceptable.’
At a hearing today, Defence Committee chairman Tobias Ellwood raised concerns that weapons including Hellfire missiles, which are carried by British Army Apache helicopters, have different ‘sell-by dates depending where you are in Nato’.
‘That doesn’t make sense at all … that a Hellfire missile that we have has to be thrown away, dealt with, if it is not used, before an American missile of the same age,’ Mr Ellwood added. Lieutenant General Robert Magowan, deputy chief of the Defence Staff, replied: ‘This is one of the key priorities for us, because it is not acceptable.’
Andy Start, who is in charge of defence equipment and support at the MoD, told MPs: ‘It is very clear that whilst we have been in a post-Cold War environment the attitude around this dynamic has been to be extremely safety conscious, and I think we are in a different world.
‘We are definitely in a war economy at the moment and that requires a different attitude to risk, which is a conversation we are having a lot.
‘Specifically around weapons, that conversation around taking more risk, which … allows us to keep weapons longer and to use them in a wider environment.’
Ministry of Defence officials appeared to play down the significance of the Chancellor’s spring budget over an upcoming review of UK defence and security.
The civil servants from the MoD were pressed about budgetary pressures on the department.
The committee expressed some surprise that officials could contribute to the much anticipated refresh of the integrated review – a document setting out the UK’s vision and strategy on defence, security and foreign policy – without having a clear sense of what budget would be provided by the Treasury.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is due to deliver his spring statement on March 15, with reports that Defence Secretary Ben Wallace is pushing for a significant boost in his department’s spending.
It comes amid the backdrop of the war in Ukraine and rising global tensions with China.
Both issues are expected to influence any changes to the integrated review.
But David Williams, permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence, appeared to play down the need for a clear sequence between the spring statement and publication of the integrated review.
He told MPs that he did not know when the updated integrated review would be published, stressing that it was cross-department project.
‘Work is well in hand, I don’t think it will be very long,’ he said.
Andy Start, who is in charge of defence equipment and support at the MoD, told MPs: ‘It is very clear that whilst we have been in a post-Cold War environment the attitude around this dynamic has been to be extremely safety conscious, and I think we are in a different world.’
‘I think for me it is about a doubling-down and a refinement, rather than a fundamental change,’ he told MPs.
Pressed by Mr Ellwood that it was a fact that more money was needed for the MoD, Mr Williams: ‘We look to get the defence budget that matches the Government’s ambition for its asks of our armed forces.’
But Democratic Unionist Party MP Gavin Robinson expressed surprise at the sequencing of the integrated review update and the spring budget, telling officials: ‘Do you understand it would be hard for us to conceive a process where you conclude all of your planning assumptions and publish an (integrated review) refresh without knowing what the budget is?’
Mr Williams acknowledged his point, but suggested that an ‘assumption’ about budgets might be adequate.
‘We clearly need an assumption about the budget going forward to reflect any detailed changes in the plan for the Ministry of Defence and the Armed Forces. How much of that needs to be painted in for a high level IR refresh will rather depend on what it says.’
The Government has pledged to maintain the defence budget at at least 2% of GDP, amid current fiscal challenges.
Source: Read Full Article
