Ministers too often believe they can predict future security threats to the UK, despite the lessons of history, a powerful group of MPS warn today.
They cautioned David Cameron’s government to rethink as it prepares to unveil next week the results of its Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR).
A new report by the Commons Defence Committee warns that the UK should develop versatile Armed Forces capable of adapting to a range of potential crises.
MPs suggested the government’s policy was flawed in assuming “that the probability of potential threats becoming actual ones can reliably be predicted”.
They also warned of 'general vulnerabilities' in the Armed Forces including numbers and gaps in capabilities.
Following the last SDSR in 2010 the Army is in the process of scaling back from 100,000 to 80,000 personnel.
The Prime Minister was forced to pledge earlier this year he could not make more soldiers redundant.
Douglas Chapman, the SNP MP for Dunfermline and West Fife and a member of the committee, said that the report highlighted critical capability issues along with a lack of expertise in Whitehall in identifying threats.
He added: “It is becoming clear, in the current security climate, that the UK Government must focus more on the most fundamental aspects of our defence in order that our defence and security personnel can respond adequately to all emerging threats.
“Put simply, I do not understand how spending up to £167 billion on a weapons system that is of questionable military value in the 21st century is seen as a higher priority than the recruitment and retention of service personnel, identified in the report as a vulnerability, alongside capability gaps like the lack of Maritime Patrol Aircraft.
“I will be making sure these are addressed when the SDSR is announced next week.”
Defence committee chairman Dr Julian Lewis said that there was an “overconfidence in Government that it can reliably predict which threats will transpire. History has proven that this approach does not work.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel