Category: Defence

  • Ben Wallace – 2023 Statement on the Defence Command Paper Refresh

    Ben Wallace – 2023 Statement on the Defence Command Paper Refresh

    The statement made by Ben Wallace, the Secretary of State for Defence, in the House of Commons on 18 July 2023.

    With permission, I would like to make a statement on the publication of our refreshed defence Command Paper. It is just over two years since we published the original Command Paper in March 2021. In those two years, our security has been challenged in so many ways. This is Defence’s response to a more contested and volatile world.

    In the last four years that I have been Defence Secretary, I have been consistent about the reform I have sought to implement. I want Defence to be threat-led—understanding and acting on the threats facing our nation as our sole mission; not protecting force structures, cap badges or much-loved equipment but ensuring that we are focused on challenging threats.

    I want the Ministry of Defence to be a campaigning Department, adopting a more proactive posture, and our forces more forward and present in the world, with a return to campaigning assertively and constantly, pushing back those threats and our adversaries. I want Defence to be sustainable in every sense. For too long, Defence was hollowed out by both Labour and Conservative Governments, leaving our forces overstretched and underequipped. We must match our ambitions to our resources, our equipment plans to our budget, and take care of our people to sustain them in their duties. We must never forget the travesty of the Snatch Land Rovers in Afghanistan.

    The 2021 defence Command Paper was true to those principles and, with some tough choices, presented an honest plan for what we can and will achieve: a credible force, capable of protecting the nation, ready to meet the threats of today but investing heavily to modernise for those of the future; a force in which every major platform would be renewed by 2035, from armoured vehicles to Dreadnought submarines, frigates to satellites.

    We did not plan on issuing a new Command Paper just two years on. Many of the conclusions of that Command Paper remain right: Russia was and is the greatest threat to European security, and China’s rapid military modernisation and growing assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific and beyond do pose an increasing challenge to us all. However, I have always said that as the situation changes, we must change with it. Since the first DCP was released, the world has shifted once more, from a competitive age to a contested and volatile world. The technology advances we predicted materialised. The threats and challenges we feared have manifested.

    There is no more immediate threat than Russia. Its full-scale invasion of Ukraine was not simply an assault on a proud and sovereign nation but an attack on all our values, European security and the open international order on which stability and prosperity have depended for over three quarters of a century. Right now, the people of Ukraine are suffering the tragic consequences of President Putin’s illegal, unprovoked invasion. His naked aggression and imperial ambitions have played out in a tragedy of epic human suffering. The brave citizen soldiers of the armed forces of Ukraine are protecting their own nation and people, quite heroically taking on the once mighty Russian forces. The whole House recognises that they fight not just for their freedom but for ours. They are not just liberating their homeland but defending the rules-based system.

    As Defence Secretary it is important to import the lessons learned from the conflict to our own forces. While I wish such lessons were generated in a different way, the conflict has become an incubator of new ways of war. They are proving the way for warfare in the 2020s—whole of nation, internationally partnered, innovative, digitised, operating with a tempo, precision and range requirement and a recognition that there is a trade-off between assurance levels and operational impact.

    I am proud, too, of the role the UK is playing in supporting Ukraine, whether providing equipment, training or political support, or galvanising European and international allies and industrial partners to do likewise. But the return of war to the continent of Europe, alongside growing threats elsewhere in the world, has meant that we must sharpen our approach. The integrated review refresh published in March outlined how we would do that. It would shape the global strategic environment, increase our focus on deterrence and defence, address vulnerabilities that leave our nation exposed and invest in the UK’s unique strengths.

    Defence is central to all those efforts. That is why, after three decades in which all parties have continued drawing the post cold-war peace dividend, this Prime Minister reversed that trend and provided Defence with an additional £24 billion over four years. He and the Chancellor have gone further since, in response to the war in Ukraine. Next year we will spend over £50 billion on defence for the first time in our history. That is nearly £12 billion a year more cash investment than when I became Defence Secretary in 2019—a real-terms increase of more than 10%. This Government have committed to increasing spending yet further over the longer term to 2.5% of GDP, as we improve the fiscal position and grow our economy.

    Our defence plans, and the armed forces to deliver them, must be robust and credible—not fantasy force designs, unfunded gimmicks or top trump numbers. As Russia has so effectively proven, there is no point having parade ground armies and massed ranks of men and machines if they cannot be integrated as a single, full spectrum force, sustained in the field under all the demands of modern warfighting. That takes professional forces, well equipped and rapidly adaptable, supported by critical enablers and vast stockpiles of munitions. That is why in this document, hon. Members will not find shiny new announcements, comms-led policies driving unsustainable force designs or any major new platforms for military enthusiasts to put up on their charts on their bedroom wall. We stand by the Command Paper we published in 2021 but we must get there faster, doing defence differently and getting ourselves on to a campaign footing to protect the nation and help it prosper.

    As I said standing here when DCP21 was announced, we owe it to the men and women of our armed forces to make policy reality. The work was just beginning. In this refresh, we have focused on how to drive the lessons of Ukraine into our core business and on how to recover the warfighting resilience needed to generate credible conventional deterrence. The great advantage of having served in Defence for some time is that my ministerial team and I have now taken a proper look under the bonnet. Consequently, we are clear that our strategic advantage derives from four key sources which require urgent prioritisation.

    First and foremost are our first-class people. Our men and women are not just brave and committed, but talented and incredibly skilled. They are our real battle-winning capability. It is our duty to ensure they are as well supported, prepared and equipped as possible, so we are going to invest in them. Last year, I commissioned Richard Haythornthwaite to conduct the first review of workforce incentivisation for almost 30 years. It is such good work that we are incorporating the response into our Command Paper, and today I am unveiling a new employment model and skills framework for our armed forces. It will offer our people a spectrum of service that allows far greater career flexibility, making it easier for military personnel to zig-zag between different roles, whether regular or reserve, or between the civil service and industry.

    We are transforming our forces’ overall employment offer by adopting a total reward approach to provide a much more compelling and competitive incentivisation package. Since all our armed forces personnel deserve the best quality accommodation, we are injecting a further £400 million to improve our service accommodation in the next two years. Many of us over Christmas will have been frustrated by the poor support our service personnel and their families received from those tasked with looking after their accommodation. It is for that reason that I have withheld their profit and used the money to freeze for one year only the rent increases our personnel were due to pay. Taken together alongside such initiatives as wraparound childcare, they are intended to enrich careers and enhance the ability of our most talented people to keep protecting the British people, and to ensure they are rewarded and fulfilled while they do so.

    Our second priority is further strengthening our scientific and technological base. We are already world leaders in specific areas, but to continue outmatching our adversaries we must stay ahead of the curve in digital, data and emerging scientific fields. In 2021, we said we would invest £6.6 billion in advanced research and development. In fact, we are now investing significantly more to stay ahead in the technologies proving themselves vital on the battlefields of Ukraine, such as AI, quantum and robotics. We are enabling a culture of innovation across Defence, pulling through those R&D breakthroughs to the frontline. Following in Ukraine’s footsteps, we are increasingly sourcing the £100 solutions that can stop £100 million threats in their tracks, winning both the kinetic and economic exchanges of modern warfare.

    Of course, our ability to do that depends on the quality of our relationship with the industry, which is our third priority. I am pushing the Ministry of Defence to form a closer alliance with our industrial partners. A genuine partnership to sustain our defence will mean doing things differently. Ukraine reminds us that time waits for no one. It is no good holding out for the 100% solution that is obsolete by the time it is launched. Often, 80% is good enough, especially if it means swiftly putting kit into the hands of our service personnel. Capabilities can be rapidly upgraded, spirally developed, for the relentless cycles of battlefield adaptation to win the innovation battle. Instead of sticking to acquisition programmes that drag on for decades, we are setting maximum delivery periods of five years for hardware and three years for digital programmes.

    Our fourth priority is productivity and campaigning. To face this increasingly contested and volatile world, we need to make major changes to the machinery of the Department and its methods. We are emphasising an ethos focused ruthlessly on the delivery of real-world effect, increasing the bang for buck in everything we do. This approach reaches into every part of the Defence enterprise, from the front line to the back office, and involves a major redesign of the Department. We must shift our whole organisational culture away from the previous peacetime mentality to one where we live and operate as we would fight, focusing more on outputs than inputs and achieving a better balance between risk and reward. That means empowering people to live and operate alongside partners, and sometimes to be enabled by them when in lower threat environments. That means ensuring our equipment, whether Type 31, Challenger 3, or Typhoons, has the infrastructure and supplies needed to sustain operations more of the time and to deliver real-world effect wherever and whenever it is needed. And it means working with the relevant regulatory authorities, for example the Military Aviation Authority, to accelerate the experimentation, testing and innovating of new technologies, while remaining within legal bounds.

    I want to emphasise one final aspect of the Command Paper refresh, namely the development of a global campaigning approach. We started with a review of our head office, where we broke out campaign delivery from policy formation and established integrated campaign teams. They have adversary focuses, not geographic, and will drive our enduring campaigns in the same way operational commanders lead our forces on deployed operations. The indivisibility of operational theatres in today’s world means Defence must be constantly ready to respond globally to safeguard our interests and those of our allies. Sometimes it will be to evacuate our citizens in moments of crisis, such as in Sudan. Other times it will be to deter an adversary or reassure a friend. As we have shown through our support for Ukraine, the UK Government have the political will, but that only matters if it is matched by our military agility. Today, we are establishing a defence global response force. Ready, integrated and lethal, it will better cohere existing forces from across land, sea, air, space and cyber, to get there first in response to unpredictable events around the world.

    Crucially, today’s paper also recognises that it is in the interconnected world and that the UK is unlikely to act alone. Partnerships are critical to our security and prosperity. In future, we will be allied by design and national by exception. Our support for NATO will remain iron-clad, but we will continue to prioritise our core relationships. We will invest in deepening relationships with our new partners. It is why we have invested to expand our global defence network, improving communications, and co-ordinating defence attachés within our intelligence functions. None of that is headline-grabbing stuff, but it is the fine details that make the difference to our national security.

    To conclude, the paper is the result of having several years in the Department to understand where it needs most attention. That continuity in office is improving and I am incredibly grateful to the long-serving Minister for Armed Forces, my right hon. Friend the Member for Wells (James Heappey), whose experience in uniform and public office provided the basis for this paper. We are grateful to the hundreds of individuals and groups who contributed to the first challenge phase of its drafting, from academics to serving personnel and industry representatives, not to mention the many Members of this House. Most of what we learned from them is encapsulated in the document.

    This is likely to be one of my last appearances at the Dispatch Box. It has been the greatest privilege to serve as Secretary of State for Defence for the last four years. I thank my team, civil servants, special advisers and Members for their support and their challenge. All of us here have the common interest of defending this fine country, its values and its freedoms. Of all the many functions of Government, Defence is the most important and is more important than ever, as the next 10 years will be more unstable and insecure. The men and women of our armed forces are second to none and Britain’s place in the world is anchored in their professionalism and sacrifice. I believe we will increasingly call on them in the years ahead. We must ensure that they are ready to answer that call. I wish them and whomever replaces me well. I commend the statement to the House.

  • Ben Wallace – 2023 Statement on Camp Bagnold and Gifting to the UN

    Ben Wallace – 2023 Statement on Camp Bagnold and Gifting to the UN

    The statement made by Ben Wallace, the Secretary of State for Defence, in the House of Commons on 17 July 2023.

    I have today laid before the House a departmental minute describing the provision of infrastructure worth £4,226,970 to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilisation Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) in Gao, Mali.

    MINUSMA is a UN-led, non-combat mission to support the political processes in Mali and to carry out a number of security related task, for which the UK contribution, since December 2020, was the Long Range Reconnaissance Group (Mali) (LRRG(M)).

    The security and political situation in Mali has deteriorated significantly since the UK review of MINUSMA at the start of 2022.There have been two coups in the past two years and the transitional Government of Mali (TGoM), which seized power in 2021, has continued to delay democratic transition and has routinely failed to address the numerous security and humanitarian issues it is facing. The TGoM has also behaved in a way that is constraining MINUSMA’s delivery against its mandate. On 14 November 2022 the Government announced they were withdrawing their forces from Mali.

    The UK Ministry of Defence intend to gift the Camp Bagnold infrastructure, with a value of £4,226,970, for $1(US) to UN MINUSMA. The gifting transfers all ownership rights of the camp to the UN, including any future responsibility for the remediation and disposal of the site.

    On the 16 June 2023 the TGoM asked MINUSMA to leave Mali “without delay”. Despite this, we still intend to gift the Camp to the UN MINUSMA. Given the fast-moving situation on the ground we request special urgency to lay a departmental minute in Parliament for four sitting days before recess. This is necessary to allow us to meet the UN MINUSMA request that any contract to transfer the ownership of the camp must be signed before 31 July 2023.

  • Martin Docherty-Hughes – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    Martin Docherty-Hughes – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    The speech made by Martin Docherty-Hughes, the SNP defence spokesperson, in the House of Commons on 15 June 2023.

    Let me associate myself with the comments about the former Member for Hampstead and Kilburn—a great actor, but, I have to say to Labour colleagues, a great socialist, who will be deeply missed. I express my condolences to Labour group Members—a great loss to socialism.

    I have sat on the Defence Select Committee for almost five years. I have sat through enough evidence sessions and seen enough gloss poured over the evident shortcomings of this programme by Ministers and officials alike to treat today’s statement with much scepticism. Despite the fact that we are seeing various cheaper competitor platforms to Ajax tested in the theatre in Ukraine before our very eyes, we continue with what I think is an absolute classic 24-carat bespoke option straight out of Main Building’s fevered imagination. Today’s news is telling us that Ajax will not be ready until the end of the decade—the Minister may correct me if I am wrong—meaning that a full 20 years will have passed between concept and deployment. That is, frankly, unforgivable.

    Yet so many of us across the Chamber would tell us today that it does not have to be like this. To give just one allied example, Norway has recently terminated its contract for the NH90 helicopters after problems were found, and will return all those helicopters while demanding a full refund. What is stopping the MOD from doing the same with Ajax and General Dynamics?

    As we have talked about Ukraine, if we eventually ever see any of these vehicles deployed in the field, would the Minister be happy for the UK to supply them to a country fighting for its survival against a technically advanced adversary?

    James Cartlidge

    I did not have the pleasure of appearing before the hon. Gentleman in the Select Committee. Obviously, we bring forward this capability to ensure that it can add huge capability on the frontline when it really matters—that is what it is being tested for. That is why it is really good news that the Army is now training on that vehicle at Salisbury Plain. Of course, that has happened much later than we wanted. That is why we are here and have the Sheldon report. Ultimately, we want to improve our acquisitions system, but procurement can be complex, even for simple things such as ferries, as the Scottish Government have themselves discovered.

  • Tobias Ellwood – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    Tobias Ellwood – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    The speech made by Tobias Ellwood, the Conservative MP for Bournemouth East, in the House of Commons on 15 June 2023.

    May I immediately associate myself with your kind words about Glenda Jackson, Madam Deputy Speaker?

    We now have in the Chamber not one, but three current or former procurement Ministers who bear the scars of this project. I am pleased that we are able to discuss the matter so openly and I commend the recent work that the MOD has done to get on top of the issue.

    Ajax is now a case study that the MOD and DNS should use on how not to do procurement. This is all about the British Army’s recce vehicle. The current one being used, the Scimitar, was introduced in 1971. It is good to hear that the soldiers the Minister met said that the replacement is better than the last—that is brilliant, because it was built in 1971. Ajax’s journey has been miserable. It started in 2010 and the delivery date was 2017, yet it is not expected to enter service until 2030. Something very serious has gone wrong.

    I absolutely welcome Clive Sheldon’s report. The Committee will look into that in more detail and, rather fortuitously, a Sub-Committee study on procurement, by my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), is currently under way. I am sure that he will have more words on how we will digest the report in more detail.

    The Minister covered some of the issues. Concerns include the relationships between different entities within, or associated with, the MOD. The senior responsible officer has been criticised for not being a single point of contact or owning the actual project itself but having to have a number of projects going concurrently. Concerns got stuck because of people taking a rigid view of their remits. It is not just with Ajax that there is a problem; there is also with the land warfare capability. We have similar problems with the main battle tank and the armoured fighting vehicle. I hope that those problems will be addressed when the defence Command Paper comes out.

    James Cartlidge

    I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Chairman of the Select Committee. Of course, we are absolutely committed to engaging with his Committee and, indeed, with the Sub-Committee, before which I will appear next week. I was born in 1974. He makes a striking point about the existing vehicle being from 1971—it is the same age as my elder brother. I take his point that one might therefore expect servicemen to say that it is night and day.

    I put great store by meeting those on the frontline, and I will always continue to do that. It was a great privilege to go to Bovington. One of the soldiers I sat next to in the Ares version had been in a Challenger 2 when it was hit by an IED—I think it was in Iraq or Afghanistan; he did not say. He felt confidence in the protection. It is so important that we interact with the soldiers on the frontline. Ultimately, that is the point: we want to deliver a better acquisitions system for them and I look forward to working with my right hon. Friend’s Committee to that end.

  • Chris Evans – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    Chris Evans – 2023 Speech on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    The speech made by Chris Evans, the Shadow Defence Minister, in the House of Commons on 15 June 2023.

    Before I start, if you will allow me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to pay tribute to Glenda Jackson, our former colleague, given the sad news that she recently passed away. She was a doughty champion for social justice and was the greatest actor of this or any other generation. I am sure further tributes will be paid in the coming days.

    What the Sheldon review has shown without a shadow of a doubt is that Ajax is the biggest procurement failure for a decade. The review is beyond damning. For a report to state,

    “Reporting was at times lacking, or unclear, or overly optimistic. That led to senior personnel and Ministers being surprised to discover in late 2020 and early 2021 that the programme was at much greater risk than they had appreciated”,

    is frankly embarrassing.

    There is no place to hide any longer. The failure to manage this contract was on this Conservative Government’s watch. It was they who allowed the relationship with General Dynamics to break down to such an extent that every time Ajax was mentioned, here or in the press, there was fevered speculation that the contract was about to be cancelled. That has caused anxiety for the Army and above all for the workers in General Dynamics in both Merthyr Tydfil and Oakdale in my own Islwyn constituency. Even the threat of losing 400 jobs would be devastating for the south Wales economy.

    This programme has cost £5.5 billion and has been running for 13 years, but has yet to deliver one deployable vehicle. If this was the private sector, heads would roll, so I ask the Minister this: has any action been taken against anyone responsible for this mess? What new procedures have already been put in place on other major programmes to stop similar mistakes happening? Ministers must ensure that our NATO obligations are met in full, but, whether it is Ajax, delays to Wedgetail or a modern war-fighting division, NATO must have concerns. Have any been raised with the Government about Ajax?

    I well remember the sense of excitement from workers at Oakdale when this contract was signed in 2010, just after I was elected. The Ajax contract was then labelled a game changer, not only for south Wales, but for the Army. It is truly sad that we have arrived at a point where Ajax has become a byword for waste and incompetence.

    Workers at General Dynamics should have been listened to, but they were not. There was a

    “lack of appreciation of diverse and contrary voices, especially from those working on the ‘shopfloor’. These voices were not fully included, and were too easily dismissed.”

    Those are not my words, but the words of the report. Perhaps if workers had been listened to, we would not be standing here now.

    As the Minister knows, Ajax is not an isolated case: 37 out of 39 defence equipment contracts being run by the Ministry of Defence are marked red or amber by the National Audit Office. That includes Morpheus, which is extremely important to our armed forces. Have the problems with that programme’s communications system been fixed, or are they unfixable? What contingency plans are being made for Morpheus?

    For a contract as important as Ajax, with so much speculation around it, it is amazing that we have not had an oral statement on Ajax since December 2021. For too long, the Government have avoided scrutiny on this issue. On this and other future contracts, will the Minister commit to giving regular updates to the House? We are, after all, ensuring soldiers’ safety—the most important thing about the contract—and spending taxpayers’ money. I find myself in agreement with the Minister when he says that change has to come. It is not a moment too soon.

    James Cartlidge

    I begin by agreeing with the hon. Gentleman on Glenda Jackson; I do not think she was in the House when I was here, but she was an amazing actress and I join in his sentiments and echo them entirely.

    I recognise that the hon. Gentleman is not just the shadow spokesman but has a clear constituency interest, and I respect that. He talks about fevered speculation and the impact on the workforce, and I totally understand that. We do not want to see that. He talks about coming to the House: I am here today to be absolutely clear with everyone about the latest position. In fact, my colleague the Paymaster General regularly updated the House on the position around Ajax when he was the Minister. My predecessor, now the Lord Chancellor, also issued a written statement earlier this year that was very detailed about the programme, so I think we have been consistent in updating the House.

    On some of the hon. Gentleman’s specific questions, he asked about action on individuals. What we said when commissioning this review was that disciplinary action would be taken only if there was evidence of gross misconduct, and Mr Sheldon found no evidence of misconduct, let alone gross misconduct. That is the clear reason why individual action has not been taken.

    In terms of action across programmes, I point the hon. Gentleman to the very significant investment by the Army of £70 million over the next 10 years in Army procurement programmes, including in the past two years a doubling in the number of SROs and a doubling of the amount of time that SROs spend on their responsible major projects. Those are significant investments.

    I also point out to the hon. Gentleman some of the improvements we have seen. I accept that we need to go further but, if I may draw a contrast, this is not the first review of acquisition. Bernard Gray issued an independent “Review of Acquisition for the Secretary of State for Defence” in 2009, which described a poorly performing procurement system. That review found that

    “the average programme overruns by 80% or c.5 years from the time specified at initial approval through to in service dates”,

    and that was under a previous Government.

    These problems have been around for some time and it is disappointing. I have pointed to the improvements we have seen, but let me be absolutely clear: the ultimate reason we have this report is to learn lessons and the way we respond to it is to deliver a fundamentally better acquisition system. I totally agree with the hon. Gentleman on that and I hope we can all work together to that end.

  • James Cartlidge – 2023 Statement on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    James Cartlidge – 2023 Statement on the Armoured Cavalry Programme – Sheldon Review

    The statement made by James Cartlidge, the Minister for Defence Procurement, in the House of Commons on 15 June 2023.

    With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement to update the House on the review conducted by Clive Sheldon KC on the lessons to be learned from the armoured cavalry programme, which is the Army programme centred on the Ajax vehicles. The Defence Secretary has previously acknowledged that the programme was a troubled programme. Albeit that he has more recently announced that it has turned a corner, it is against the backdrop of concerns he had about the programme, and those of this House about what was known at the time of publishing the integrated review, that he commissioned an independent review by a senior legal figure to investigate the circumstances.

    In May last year, Clive Sheldon KC was appointed to lead a lessons learned review into the armoured cavalry programme. The review’s terms of reference were to

    “identify lessons and make recommendations to help Ministry of Defence (MOD) deliver major programmes more effectively in future, with a particular focus on how MOD shares and elevates issues across the Department.”

    An earlier Ministry of Defence report, by David King, specifically relating to the health and safety concerns about noise and vibration, was published in December 2021. We continue to make good progress on implementing the recommendations from that report, some of which are echoed in Mr Sheldon’s review.

    Mr Sheldon submitted his report to Ministers on 19 May, and I am today publishing that report, unredacted, on gov.uk, and placing a copy in the Library of the House. I wish to formally thank Mr Sheldon and his team for the painstaking work that they have undertaken to enable us to better understand how the MOD can improve the governance, culture and leadership of our major programmes. They interviewed some 70 people and considered tens of thousands of pages of evidence.

    The resulting report makes for difficult reading, highlighting a number of systemic, cultural and institutional problems across several areas of the Department. These problems include: fragmented relationships and the conflicting priorities of the senior responsible owner role. It also points to a reticence to raise, and occasionally by seniors to listen to, genuine problems in a timely, evidenced manner.

    We accept these findings and most of Mr Sheldon’s 24 formal recommendations, with 15 accepted and nine accepted in principle. Crucially, the review did not find that either Ministers or Parliament were misled. Equally, the review team did not see any evidence of misconduct by any individual, let alone gross misconduct, and nothing that would justify disciplinary action. It is, though, true that many of the behaviours highlighted in the report are far from ideal, but in many cases they have already been recognised and acted on, both specifically on the armoured cavalry programme as well as across the Department.

    Where work is not already under way to implement a recommendation, we commit to making the necessary changes at pace. In the interest of time, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will address the recommendations in the themes set out by Mr Sheldon in his executive summary, rather than going through each of the recommendations.

    A number of recommendations relate to MOD’s internal relationships, including with the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory. Considerable effort has already been made to address these issues within and beyond the Ajax programme. This has resulted in much improved working and reporting arrangements, in particular with the Defence Equipment & Support organisation and also the newly established acquisition safety cell that advises the Investment Approvals Committee on equipment safety matters. Escalation routes also exist for DSTL through the chief science officer where concerns are not acted on.

    Another area of focus is SROs. I know that many colleagues are interested in this point. We fully agree with the need to improve how senior responsible owners are supported and much work has gone into upskilling and supporting SROs, ensuring that they have the time and space to focus on delivering their programmes and can build skills through the Major Projects Leadership Academy.

    Today, four in every five of our major project SROs are committing at least half their time to leading their programmes—half the Army’s 19 SROs dedicate 100% of their time. We also agree in principle with Mr Sheldon’s presumption for a minimum tenure, subject to compatibility with employment law.

    Finally, the report comments extensively on a culture that led to issues not being escalated and makes recommendations to improve that and the flow of information. Transparency has improved since the period of this report. For Ajax, there are detailed updates through the SRO to Ministers that ensure the potential issues are exposed early should they arise in the future. Processes will be further strengthened through the defence acquisition operating model and guidance. Work is also under way to implement a project delivery data strategy to strengthen the use of data to both support performance reporting and assist in early identification of issues. Of course, the main aim of commissioning this review was to learn lessons to improve procurement—not just on Ajax, but across the MOD’s programmes.

    Ultimately, the core of our intent is to ensure that the equipment we procure for the British armed forces is of the highest possible standard and, furthermore, that our service personnel have faith in the system and the taxpayer has faith in our spending of money from the public purse. Quite simply, we need to deliver change across the Department, turning widespread desire for acquisition reform into tangible reality, in particular driving increased pace and agility into acquisition, so that we can keep pace with technology and maintain our competitive edge.

    Although I recognise the many challenges in this programme to date and the need to learn lessons, I would stress that there is already intense work under way in the Department—especially at DE&S—to improve performance, with encouraging signs. For example, between December 2020 to December 2022 we saw a reduction from 6.1 years to 5.1 years in the time that it takes to go from outline business case to delivering equipment into the hands of our armed forces.

    In further positive news, I hope the House will welcome the significant progress made to recover the Ajax programme. I can confirm that, as of Tuesday afternoon, the Household Cavalry has been undergoing standard Army field training on Salisbury plain in a range of Ajax vehicles. Focused on individual and crew training, this step marks the restarting of British Army training on these sophisticated vehicles, and I hope underlines that this project really has turned the corner. Indeed, last Friday I had the great privilege of visiting Bovington to experience the Ajax vehicle at first hand.

    I am pleased to report that the soldiers I met described the vehicle and its capabilities as “night and day”—a phrase used repeatedly—compared with their current equipment. In describing Ajax’s strengths, the soldiers I spoke to emphasised the platform’s high mobility, increased firepower from the new cannon and a highly sophisticated sensor suite that really helps them do their job, representing in totality a very real and positive step change in capability—all packaged in a vehicle with high levels of crew protection and survivability. As training increases across other field Army units on the 44 vehicles already delivered, in parallel General Dynamics’s personnel in Wales continue to run their production lines to build the operationally deployable vehicles, with the end goal of 589 fully operational vehicles by 2029.

    To conclude, I reiterate my gratitude to Mr Sheldon and his team for their considerable efforts and for distilling his findings into clear lessons and recommendations for the future. Our focus now is on understanding and applying those lessons, ensuring that they are implemented in the armoured cavalry and other major defence programmes, as well as ensuring that we deliver the game-changing capability that Ajax will provide to the British Army as quickly as possible. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Ben Wallace – 2023 Speech at the D-Day 79 Commemorations

    Ben Wallace – 2023 Speech at the D-Day 79 Commemorations

    The speech made by Ben Wallace, the Secretary of State for Defence, on 6 June 2023.

    Mr. Minister, Your Excellency, veterans, ladies and gentlemen.

    Before coming here my officials drafted a speech they thought I might want to deliver.

    It celebrated the heroes, objectives captured and the units.

    And if I had not served myself I would have no doubt I would have delivered it.

    But what I wanted to say today was that this day belongs as much to the ordinary soldier, sailor, airman as it does the outstanding.

    Because the 6th June was an achievement of the platoon commanders, the non-commissioned officers, the private, and the airman and then naval rating.

    Because it is they who had to conquer first the fear.

    Who had to sort order from chaos, and who in the end had to stand up and walk towards the guns.

    It was they who had to inspire their section or troops.

    They who had no certainty of survival.

    Each man on 6 June would have to have rationalised the potential death they faced with themselves.

    That was the first obstacle on the day to overcome.

    And once that fear was overcome the task of turning the vast enterprise that was Operation Overlord could commence.

    As we celebrate the victory of the Allied forces on these beaches 79 years ago today, we should reflect that at this very moment there are men and women of Ukraine trying to overcome that same fear and trepidation.

    In assembly areas and on start lines along the vast front, each individual will be mentally preparing themselves for potential death or victory.

    They will be experiencing that same anxious feeling in the stomach. They will be trying to think of their home in the same way those Allies who had come from so very far away to this beach, on this day, 79 years ago.

    They will be looking to their friends beside them and their Corporals for encouragement or reassurance.

    The fear that many of us have witnessed first-hand will be somewhere behind the eyes.

    They will be doing what the Free French did so powerfully on this day. They will be fighting for their lands, their soil.

    They will be fighting for Europe to be free.

    We should not underestimate the challenge it is to go forward under fire.

    Attacking is a very different task from defending.

    The memorials here today remind us of that.

    We must be grateful as a generation that on that day of days courage was on our side.

    That despite all the chaos, and fear and noise, it was the ordinary who grabbed their rifle, overcame fear and fought for us all.

  • Ben Wallace – 2023 Speech at 20th IISS Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore

    Ben Wallace – 2023 Speech at 20th IISS Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore

    The speech made by Ben Wallace, the Secretary of State for Defence, in Singapore on 3 July 2023.

    Good morning and thank you to IISS for hosting. It’s a privilege to be here in Singapore. An island nation and trading powerhouse with which the UK has much in common, not to mention a shared history. And I’m delighted to share this panel with my colleagues from Canada and the Philippines, just two of the nations we’re working closely with to keep strengthening the international order that benefits everyone.

    Lots has happened since the last UK Defence Secretary spoke here and the world already looks different in so many ways. We’ve fought off the pandemic. We did that by collaboration, not by isolation. The UK has had three Prime Ministers and we’ve lost our great Queen. Her similarly great namesake, the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier group, made her maiden visit to the Indo-Pacific in 2021. In that same year, the United Kingdom published the Integrated Review, signalling our increased commitment to this region.

    That review has been updated this year and we’re pressing ahead with our ‘tilt’ to the Indo-Pacific, not least becoming ASEAN’s first new Dialogue Partner this century. Of course, events in Europe are focusing us closer to home at the moment.

    Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. And it has spurred yet more countries to seek the collective security of NATO membership, precisely what President Putin claimed he was acting to prevent.

    But as busy as things are at home, developments continue apace. Indo-Pacific economic performance makes this the world’s undisputed growth engine – 40 per cent of global GDP, 60 per cent of global shipping, home to half the world’s population, and some of the fastest growing and most innovative economies.

    But far from seeking to secure blocks of interests, we believe this region offers enormous economic opportunity for all. It’s why European companies and countries are looking east, and why the United Kingdom Government considers our interests to lie as much here as they do in Europe. Indeed, in 2022 our total exports to the Indo-Pacific amounted to £127 billion – a remarkable increase of 22 per cent on the previous year.

    Yet just as we seek to benefit from the opportunities here, so must we also share  responsibility for the challenges. And in both regards, none are bigger than the “epoch defining” rise of China – as it was described in our Integrated Review Refresh.

    We are all now navigating the consequences of China’s rise – both those opportunities and those challenges. Lifting vast numbers out of poverty. Trading with the world. And the undeniable truth, that none of our most fundamental global issues can be solved without engagement with China.

    Be they climate change, energy and food security, economic stagnation, tech regulation, nuclear proliferation. But we must also speak plainly and acknowledge that there are also challenges from that ‘rise’. Illegal fishing, tensions in territorial waters, sovereignty disputes, and debt diplomacy.

    This session, Mr Chairman, asks ‘how can we create balance and stability in the Indo-Pacific?’ Many do consider that question purely through the lens of China and the balancing of some ‘great power competition’. But we don’t agree it has to be. We can do this in three ways… this might surprise you, coming from a Defence Secretary, but those ways are not primarily military.

    First and foremost, by upholding international rules and promoting common standards. Why rules? Because the ‘balance and stability’ we are talking about today is ultimately based on adherence to shared rules.

    The Ukraine invasion is a tragic reminder of the terrible costs when leaders disregard human life, national sovereignty, and the rules-based international system. Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, is constantly claiming that the system is simply made up by the US as they go along.

    Of course, this is a fabrication. He’s talking about the very system – including the United Nations Charter – that we conceived, including Russia, together after the Second World War and for which we fought together, in the hope of saving future generations from the scourge of war.

    Of course, Russia doesn’t want ordinary countries to now benefit from those protections or the freedom to choose because they might not choose Russia. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine – trampling sovereignty and brutalising innocent civilians – is a result of its utter disregard for rules and the belief that ‘might is right’.

    Well, they are wrong and that’s being proven by the international community’s determination to enforce those rules. Because rules are agnostic of nations’ military or economic power. They are common to all our needs. Their adherence prevents competition escalating into conflict, and disputes are resolved without fear or favour.

    What unites us is that rules apply to us all, regardless of actor or geography. We are all equal in the eyes of the law. It provides a level playing field. It ensures fair play. Which is one of the reasons, I believe, why Singapore has been so successful in recent decades. Because of the respect here for the regulatory environment, anti-corruption, dispute resolution and fair play. If it can work for Singapore, why can’t it work elsewhere?

    Whether you are the smallest country seeking to protect your fishing rights, or the largest seeking a greater share of global trade, the rules-based system is there to protect and enable us all. Yes all, including China. It is why the UK strongly believes so strongly in protecting the rights of littoral states in their Exclusive Economic Zones, as well as in the importance of upholding the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

    We reject any claims that do not adhere to its tenets. Attempts to restrict the global commons are fundamentally damaging to us all and our trade. If international treaties bearing the signature of 157 parties are junked on a whim, this represents an attack not just on one treaty, but on the entire international system.

    So, the United Kingdom will continue to demonstrate that all parties stick as close as possible to UNCLOS. Because responsible powers have a duty to protect international rules. And neither can they take a back seat in evolving those rules as well. We want a system of 21st century laws designed by all, for all.

    The second way we maintain balance and stability is by backing free trade.

    The UK has always believed in free commerce and capital flows. The more we open up competition, the more we reduce overdependence and build resilience. And neither can we afford to ‘decouple’, commercially or diplomatically.

    We believe the best resilience comes from diversification, not from protectionism. That’s why the UK is working to diversify our supply chains. It’s why we have done deals with Japan, Australia and, of course, Canada, and why we will be enthusiastic new members of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.

    You cannot put a price on the ability to sell to 500 million people with a combined GDP of £11 trillion. And we’re building on that momentum having signed free trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand – as well as Singapore, Japan, Vietnam and the Republic of Korea.

    Third, and finally, the way we preserve stability is through the promotion of our principles and values.

    Coming to Shangri-la and visiting Singapore I feel immediately at home. Despite very different national systems, we share many of the same principles and values. The belief that all nations have the right to chart their own course. Instinctive understanding of the importance of global trade. And above all, a belief in fair play.

    You don’t need to have mastered the rules of cricket to know that fair play is ingrained in the British psyche. No matter how big or small you are, how rich or poor, we believe nations should treat each other fairly, with respect. The UN conventions reinforce that and as a P5 nation, we believe we have a responsibility to help uphold those rules around the globe.

    And that’s where Defence does come in, because it has an important supporting role to play, not just in hard power projection but soft power promotion. The skills and capability of our Armed Forces are there to help friends when they’re in trouble, from humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, to crisis management and civilian evacuations. And ultimately, in times of conflict.

    I know you share that view, many of you here. We’ve seen it in Ukraine. Alongside our troops training Ukrainians in the United Kingdom are Australians, New Zealanders, as well as Canadians. The US-chaired Ukraine Defense Contact Group now includes many countries represented in this room. And we appreciate the very material support that you are sending to Ukraine to help return stability to our continent. And that’s because you recognise, as our PM said recently, that Atlantic and Pacific security is indivisible. Our security is your security.

    And that’s why the UK is becoming more proactive and more persistently engaged in the Indo-Pacific. We have been using HMS Spey and Tamar – our two Royal Navy ships, permanently deployed in the region – to deliver humanitarian aid to tsunami-hit Tonga. To help enforce the sanctions regime against DPRK. And to undertake 16 port visits and over 20 regional exercises.

    We have expanded our network of Defence Attachés and regional defence staff – including the recently restored Defence Section in Manila, Philippines – to deepen our understanding and influence in over 20 countries. And we’ve been growing our wider Defence presence in the region, whether here in Singapore, our garrison in Brunei, or the recent Reciprocal Access Agreement with Japan.

    As a result of all this we’ve been able to increase our tempo, conducting over 60 defence activities in the last two years alone, from exercises and training teams to staff talks and personnel exchanges. And, as I speak, there are 45 officers from the regional partners here today attending professional military education courses back in the United Kingdom. And all that activity helps to build partnerships. Because it is only by deepening friendships, knitting together a tapestry of partners and allies, that we can collectively secure our populations and our interests.

    The UK is a proud member of the Five Power Defence Arrangements. The region’s ‘original’ defence arrangement – established when its security landscape looked very different.  We celebrated the FPDA’s 50th anniversary in 2021 and, from my discussions while here, I’m convinced it has an even more important role to play in the years ahead. In parallel, we’re now entertaining new partnerships with the recent announcements on AUKUS and GCAP with Japan and Italy. And for the avoidance of doubt, these are not just about countering threats, or the submarines and planes that we’re building.

    They’re about the collaborative efforts that underpin them – partnering for technology-transferring, skill-sharing, information exchanges. They are national and generational enterprises. They will allow us to sustain our capabilities over the long term, and they’ll strengthen our supply chain resilience to help us prosper through the 2020s and 2030s. That’s why ASEAN is also so important. And why – in recognition of ‘ASEAN centrality’ – I formally applied in March this year for the UK to join ADMM-Plus.

    It’s this ‘partnership principle’ that runs through everything we’re doing in UK Defence, as much as it does in our trade. It’s in our refreshed Integrated Review and will shortly be reinforced in our Defence Command Paper Refresh. And it’s central to every defence engagement, every exchange programme and capability programme, every exercise or operation.

    In 2025 our Carrier Strike Group will be returning to the Indo-Pacific. It’s a great symbol of our partnership approach. Showing that, in a more turbulent world the UK will not retreat to its own shores but continue sailing far over the horizon. Using our unique convening power to bring like-minded partners together, wherever they are in this world.

    Protecting our freedom to navigate and operate today and shaping our ability to travel and trade, long into the future. So we can focus on what really matters.

    Building the best possible future for all our people.

  • Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2023 Speech to the First Sea Lord’s Sea Power Conference

    Anne-Marie Trevelyan – 2023 Speech to the First Sea Lord’s Sea Power Conference

    The speech made by Anne-Marie Trevelyan, the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, at Lancaster House in London on 16 May 2023.

    Sir Ben, thank you and thank you, Viktorija. Thank you to the Council on Geostrategy for bringing us together today through this lens of the First Sea Lord’s annual conference to discuss those challenges of maritime security in its many guises in this growing and challenging global environment.

    Good morning to all of you here, and I know also a wider but equally august crowd online. It’s always great to see Lancaster House being put to good use in bringing great minds together from military, academic to industrial leadership…. As well as you may have noticed, the pomp and ceremony it was part of for the coronation just a few days ago.

    It is always a pleasure to welcome – and I know I am allowed to say this, I asked permission first, my mother is French, so I’d like to particularly welcome our French colleagues and Admiral Vandier to the place where the Lancaster House Treaties have been negotiated over decades.

    As an island nation and a global trading power, the UK is constantly focused on the seas and oceans, and as James mentioned, we’ve been doing it a long time – since Queen Elizabeth the First we have made use of the global waterways for our prosperity, and have been leaders in ensuring we can defend them for our security, but also for the peace and freedom of many others.

    Day to day, as over a third of the UK’s food is imported, the protection of maritime trade routes has a direct effect on all our daily lives – and perhaps we don’t do enough to ensure that our citizens really understand the importance of the Royal Navy’s daily workload.

    Globally, 3 billion people rely on the sea for their food security: more than ever, this now brings new levels of challenge around responsible stewardship of the marine habitats that sustain us all, with the need for protein which nations with growing young populations need.

    So as we provide leadership in the protection of sustainable ocean habitats, we are also charged with supporting those smaller nations for whom defending and protecting their EEZs, – their exclusive economic zones, which sovereign states under UNCLOS have sovereign rights over to explore and use their own marine resources.

    This is proving less than straightforward when faced with those large distant fishing fleets who don’t share or respect their responsibilities.

    In my recent visit to the Philippines, I was struck by the existential threat felt from the gangs of Chinese militia boats gathered overfishing overfishing shoal waters, leaving local fishermen under daily threat.

    The maritime domain is under increasing pressure from systemic competition, driven by those resource needs, and is facing levels of threat and coercion not seen since World War 2. I believe that its therefore right to say we are genuinely entering a ‘new maritime century’.

    The reality is that maritime protection needs have never gone away, but rather that we have should always have remained focused on the maritime.

    With constrained defence budgets, and post the fall of the Berlin Wall, which perhaps brought a naïve assumption of peaceful times ahead, followed by land wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the maritime has been quietly getting on with its job without as much attention as it needed.

    Our Royal Navy continues to make us proud as the great guardian of our nation’s security near and far, and is respected and welcomed around the globe by our friends and allies. The expertise and trust which others share in our sailors continues to be a powerful deterrent to those who would flout the laws of the sea.

    The Royal Navy guards our national security and wider maritime stability – the leading European nation in NATO, bringing our Continuous At Sea Deterrent submarine enterprise to the defence of all, and forging the alliances and partnerships around the world that make us all safer and protect our ways of life.

    The threats we face today and in the years ahead may seem diverse and indeed far away, but they are all interconnected. It is vital if we are to continue to maintain freedom of navigation both for

    • civilian shipping
    • safe use of the sea for sourcing clean energy
    • and the sustainable management of the sea and seabed’s natural resources

    that we build and deliver multi-pronged strategies.

    Threats to global supply chains, the militarisation of the seas, and the erosion of global norms like freedom of navigation are more real than perhaps many of our UK citizens can imagine in our calm European waters.

    The degradation of fish stocks, and the precariousness of maritime livelihoods has the potential to wreak havoc with many nations’ basic ability to feed their people. The fair management and sustainable harvesting of the sea’s resources is critical to maintaining peaceful, thriving communities.

    The region which poses the greatest opportunity but also risks to UK interests is the Indo-Pacific.

    For too many here in Europe, this seems far away and can be ignored in favour of those urgent tactical crises much closer to home, in Ukraine. But that misses the point of the indivisibility of the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific to global challenges.

    So to ensure it is those opportunities which prevail, rather than the risks of disturbed or broken sea lanes and the safety of maritime sovereignty, our naval colleagues all need to work together to ensure the Indo-Pacific remains stable and free together.

    This is why the Indo-Pacific is at the heart of our long-term foreign policy strategy, as we restated in our Integrated Review Refresh published in March – it is crucial to sustaining free trade, freedom of action, and freedom from coercion.

    Sixty percent of global shipping passes through the region, for which stability there has a direct impact on households and businesses right here. When I am trying to explain to constituents what this all means, why I am on a plane half of my life going to visit countries very, very far away, I try and set it out by saying that it is about the goods we purchase every day, from your washing machine to the prawns in the supermarket. They come by ship through the South China Seas and those wider sea routes. If those routes become blocked, or unsafe for civilian shipping, the economic shocks would be dramatic.

    Beyond the present dependencies, more than half of global growth is projected to come from the Indo -Pacific by 2050, so we need to ensure the UK is right at the heart of the region’s successful future – so we must be alive to the threats, working with allies to counter them, so that in concert our businesses and people can maximise the UK’s interests and opportunities.

    The Indo-Pacific, beyond its growing potential to be an economic powerhouse, is also full of potential for clean energy resources, and the UK wants to be able to continue to bring our world leading expertise in clean energy, from wind to nuclear, to support and help to build sustainable business growth and livelihoods.

    So in our agreements and partnerships with nations from Vanuatu to the Republic of Korea, from Bangladesh to Indonesia, the UK is focused on bringing our expertise to support positive impacts in coastal communities, alongside building expertise in marine science, and sharing educational resources.

    But all of this depends on ensuring that the maritime environment for all these Indo-Pacific countries is safe and free from coercive shipping which would restrict their potential in their own waters.

    The UK government’s £500 million Blue Planet Fund is an important part of our leadership on marine issues, supporting developing countries to protect the environment and reduce poverty. It is one of the tools in our armoury to deliver the challenges set out in the Integrated Review Refresh, to tackle biodiversity loss, to halt and reverse plastic pollution, and to protect 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030.

    This is work which we will deliver most effectively working with our key naval partners, especially through our Anglo-French alliance set on an even stronger course after our recent Anglo-French summit. These are tough targets because the oceans always have the power to surprise.

    As with so many coastal regions, the North Sea – alongside my constituency’s 64 mile border in the North of England – can be both friend and foe. It’s giving us vast new resources of sustainable offshore wind power, but ferocious storms and the coldest climate in the country. Storm Arwen ripped through my patch in November 2021 and we are even now only starting to see normality resume with the opening of the National Park this spring after forestry was devastated.

    The ferocity of Storm Arwen took everyone by surprise. But it was nothing compared to that which hit Ukraine last year, as Russia illegally invaded a sovereign neighbour.   And whilst NATO and many other nations from around the world are doing all we can to support the Ukrainian war effort and their humanitarian needs, we should not overlook the maritime challenges the Ukraine crisis has created.

    Economically, a secure, stable Black Sea is essential not only to rebuild Ukraine’s future, but because it is the sea lane which provides a vast proportion of the grain and fertiliser needs of East Africa and beyond.

    The world needs those exports from the ‘breadbasket of Europe’ to resume and stabilise, alongside Ukraine’s need to deliver to the world for its own economic success.  Trade and security go hand in hand, and it’s our navies who defend and ensure these flows of goods can continue safely.

    We should also be much more comfortable in confronting the fact that the strategic link between maritime security in the Euro-Atlantic and in the Indo-Pacific are indivisible.

    Where Russian actions flout the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, this provides China with an excuse also to disregard international norms, to ignore the rules-based international system for their benefit, destroying the option of a free and open Indo-Pacific for all.

    So as we approach the NATO summit in Vilnius – I know we’re joined by Admiral Gilday and Rear Admiral Skoog Haslum this morning – the increasingly strong demonstration of defence in the Baltic, to deal with the urgent tactical situation we face, needs to demonstrate the capability and intent of those of us determined to defend free, safe and open global waters.

    The NATO partnership, through our transatlantic bonds, are keeping more than a billion citizens secure. But the rest of the world’s oceans and seas do not feel free and open to too many of the Indo-Pacific countries I visit week in week out as the UK’s Indo-Pacific minister.

    So the UK, as a committed global maritime partner, is finding new ways to bring our expertise and support to the region.  Perhaps the most challenging, exciting and long-term is AUKUS, a trilateral agreement to create an arc of defence and deterrence for the Indo-Pacific.

    AUKUS demonstrates how longstanding partners can come together to tackle the new threats. Together with the US and Australia, we are going to build a new global and interoperable nuclear-powered submarine capability, that will not only support a free and open Indo-Pacific, but will also strengthen UK contribution to NATO in Europe.

    AUKUS will create that next generation of expert engineers, welders, logisticians, programme managers, data analysts, regulators, and machinists to mention but a few, who will be building these new boats, alongside the need for growth in the number of submariners serving in the Royal Navy and Royal Australian Navy, with an extensive skill set needed to safely operate nuclear-powered submarines – and we will maximise our impact by creating a shared workforce.

    This will bring new well-paid jobs for whole life careers for a growing workforce in Barrow, Plymouth, Rosyth and Faslane in the UK, alongside whole new workforces in Adelaide and Perth in Australia.  This is not without its challenges, and the UK has a leading role to play in ensuring that our commitment to this huge military programme of work is a national endeavour here in the UK.

    AUKUS submarines are part of Australia’s defence programme, but the Royal Navy and the UK’s submarine industrial enterprise will be critical to their success.  Not since JFK’s determination to put a man on the moon, and NASA’s all encompassing national focus  – where even the cleaners believed they were integral to the success of the project –  has there been such a challenge to our industries and education systems.

    Our universities and schools need to have AUKUS at the heart of their STEM programmes, so that every young person in school today has the chance to choose a lifetime career which is part of AUKUS:

    • a global project designed to build submarines – yes
    • a multifaceted activity to design new technologies of weaponry and undersea deterrence – yes

    but perhaps most importantly, to be part of the commitment by the UK to grow the capabilities of our allies to defend their backyard, to keep the Indo-Pacific free and open, so that those nations who cannot defend themselves know that the AUKUS family is alongside them.

    I hope that, by laying the groundwork with our partners now, by investing in the solutions of the future, the threats from Indo-Pacific nations who demonstrate coercive behaviours in those waters, will understand that the UK stands firmly alongside our Indo-Pacific neighbours to weather any storms.

    We must not turn away.

    What we must do – given the scale of the challenge – is to come together, in partnership with friends old and new, to deter and defend against threats to maritime stability, and to ensure our strategic advantage in the maritime domain.

    Interoperability with our allies will be a core source of strength. Interchangeability will make us stronger still.

    Navies need to combine their power with diplomatic support, while our diplomatic efforts need to amplify our willingness and capacity to protect our collective interests, whether in home waters or across the world.

    The Navy’s Maritime Domain Awareness Programme is our gold standard for using our security expertise to build trust, partnership and capabilities, including with Middle Ground countries under pressure from revisionist states.

    Strong deterrence and joint working are its watchwords.

    And so my call to action today is to take the long view. It’s for an end to the ‘seablindness’ that can creep into an ever more complex foreign policy, and for a look into foreign policy priorities in every aspect of the processes of naval planning.

    Ultimately, it’s our combined commitment to bring together our collective wisdom, listening to those few with deep expertise in delivery of maritime security through decades of confrontations under our oceans.

    These challenges are not new, but ensuring success requires that we all lean in to deliver on our commitment. And the rationale for AUKUS is because the Indo-Pacific is a really huge expanse of water. We need more submarine capability providing deterrence in the only stealth environment remaining, across these vast areas.

    We will only deliver the pace needed if we make this a national endeavour.  If we don’t get our deterrence posture right, coercion could become aggression all too quickly.

    But if we do, we can assure the security and prosperity not only for my constituents, but for all those who are banking on us.

    Thank you.

  • James Cartlidge – 2023 Speech at the Sea Power Conference

    James Cartlidge – 2023 Speech at the Sea Power Conference

    The speech made by James Cartlidge, the Minister for Defence Procurement, at the Sea Power Conference held at Lancaster House in London on 16 May 2023.

    It’s a great pleasure to be here and even to those like me with no naval background, Sir Henry Leach needs no introduction.

    It is a great honour to have been asked to deliver this lecture in his name, especially with his daughter Henrietta here in the audience.

    With many distinguished guests, colleagues and of course senior chiefs and indeed from our many allies around the world – it’s a great pleasure to meet and see all of you.

    During the Falklands conflict, as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s so-called “knight in shining gold braid”, Sir Henry played a pivotal role in ensuring the Iron Lady stuck to her guns and secured freedom for the islanders.

    Yet as we prepare to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of the Battle of the Atlantic next weekend, we shouldn’t forget that Sir Henry’s early years were spent as a midshipman and later First Lieutenant in the stormy seas of the Second World War.

    Indeed, he had been assigned to serve on HMS Prince of Wales until his father Captain John Leach was given command of the ship.

    Tragically, Captain John went down with his ship just two days after the pair had enjoyed a gin sling and swim together.

    Despite such tragedy, Sir Henry distinguished himself in the war and as a junior lieutenant, was in charge of one of the 14-inch gun turrets in the battleship Duke of York which helped sink the German battlecruiser Scharnhorst off the North Cape in December 1943.

    There can be little doubt that such formative experiences helped shape the character and resilience of the man who went onto become First Sea Lord.

    A man who, when asked for his view on whether or not to send a taskforce to the Falklands, replied firmly: “It is not my business to say whether we should or not, but if we do not, if we pussyfoot in our actions and do not achieve complete success, in another few months we shall be living in a different country whose word counts for little.”

    On the surface 2023 appears to have very little in common with 1943.

    Yet, as Royal Navy and Allied warships sail to the Mersey ahead of three days of Battle of the Atlantic commemorations, it is striking how many of those challenges from Leach’s early wartime experiences remain relevant for us.

    We might not be at war but we find ourselves once more having to confront the resurgence of state-based dangers.

    President Putin is blockading trade in the Black Sea, threatening the undersea cables which support everyday life and increasing activity in the South Atlantic.

    And just as in the Second World War, the threats are truly global.

    We see, for example, in the South Pacific, that China is continuing to expand its Navy while using its military and economic might to intimidate its neighbours.

    Again, much like the Battle of the Atlantic, we know these maritime challenges – coupled with the diverse dangers of terrorism and global criminal networks – will unfortunately endure.

    Because the world is more dependent than ever on the oceans.

    Global financial markets dependent upon tens of thousands of miles of underwater cabling.

    90% of UK trade is carried by sea.

    And climate change is expected to raise the stakes – resulting in new sea lanes and accessible natural resources in the High North as temperatures rise and ice caps melt.

    So, Sir Henry would not be surprised to find his beloved Royal Navy more in demand than ever.

    Over the last year, our ships have been all over the world.

    Supporting NATO in Eastern Europe, leading exercises and training Ukrainian sailors in mine clearance.

    Operating in the High North alongside partners in the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF).

    And conducting numerous weapons and drugs busts in the Gulf region.

    All the while, demonstrating the very best of naval soft power around the globe with HMS Tamar and Spey visiting some 15 countries, delivering medical support to Pitcairn and emergency support to Tonga after the devastating volcano.

    And who could forget the poignant role they have played at home? With 140 naval ratings pulling the Queen’s coffin through Westminster on the day of her funeral.

    As well as those who marched through the streets of London in the King’s coronation processions earlier this month.

    So to those of you here today – and indeed all those who couldn’t make it – thank you for doing your duty for our country.

    However, the Sea Power Conference is not an arena for self-congratulation.

    As you all know our challenge now is to move our thinking on from the past and present to the future.

    None of us has a crystal ball. But here’s what we do know.

    We know the threats are growing.

    We know that rising demand is colliding with tighter budgets.

    And we know, in Sir Henry’s words, that, “effective deterrence involves maintaining a high state of readiness, being well equipped and trained, and deploying wherever and whenever the situation demands.”

    How, then, can we reconcile these competing objectives?

    To my mind we must borrow three lessons from the Battle of the Atlantic.

    Lesson one is about strengthening that key stakeholder our industrial base.

    In the Second World War, our force depended on the enormous power of our sovereign industries.

    With great yards on the Clyde, Mersey and Tyne churning out mighty warships at a rate of knots.

    Now, we’re determined to reinvigorate the famous British maritime sector.

    Not just so we can produce the hard power required to succeed in this more dangerous era.

    But so the sector itself becomes a kind of soft power deterrent – showing our adversaries that our small island has the capability to keep making battle-winning ships for as long as it takes.

    And we’re going to achieve that by providing industry with a clear demand signal – with a fresh pipeline of cutting-edge vessels coming in over the next 30 years including Dreadnoughts, Astutes, SSN-AUKUS, Fleet Solid Support ships and next-generation frigates.

    By working much more closely with suppliers, giving them the confidence to invest and upskill in the right areas.

    And by helping them win commercial and export orders in major new global markets.

    The totality overall demand or demand signal is something I’ve thought about and will do much more in future as Procurement Minister.

    We’re also supporting the next generation of shipwrights by investing in training programmes and skills academies.

    With the likes of Babcock, BAE and others as they put apprentices and graduates through their paces around the country.

    Ensuring we have a powerful on-shore advanced manufacturing skills base for decades to come, so that the Royal Navy always has the firepower it needs to carry out its plans.

    Lesson two is about encouraging innovation across the sector.

    The advent of radar and sonar helped swing the Battle of the Atlantic our way in days gone by.

    But today, technologies are advancing at a frightening pace.

    AI, for example, is already revolutionising the way data and satellite imagery is informing decision-making in battle, while also enabling forces to carry out dangerous missions with uncrewed aircraft, vehicles and ships.

    If we don’t stay ahead of the curve there is a risk that vessels designed in 2023 could be obsolete in ten years’ time frankly a lot less.

    Part of that is about integrating new technologies onto existing platforms.

    And this is where NavyX comes in, the team with the mission to get new technologies from the drawing board to the frontline as quickly as possible.

    And to help them do that, they’ve got the new and unique Experimental Vessel Patrick Blackett.

    Named after the former sailor and Nobel Prize winning scientist, Patrick Blackett provides the safe environment we need to test all the game-changing ideas coming over the horizon.

    Now we just need to make the most of it.

    By working with the regulator to unlock the maximum potential of Patrick Blackett and future technology.

    While adapting our existing platforms in the here and now, to ensure we stay one step ahead of our adversaries.

    Which brings me onto my third and final lesson. The importance of partnerships.

    Sir Henry wouldn’t have got far in the Battle of the Atlantic without the support of allies like France and later the US and Canada.

    As we are seeing today in Ukraine, great partnerships are still a great capability in their own right.

    And this year we’re also celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Polaris Sales Agreement.

    A major part of one of the most enduring bilateral relationships in history, it saw the US supplying us with our very first nuclear missiles, heralding the start of the ultimate deterrent which has kept us safe from the most extreme threats ever since.

    The truth is that while our adversaries lack allies they can trust, we are part of a large family united by values we’ve fought and died to protect – Freedom, justice and a commitment to democracy.

    And as the dangers around us grow, we’re seeing a renewed commitment to NATO across the board.

    That’s why, here in the UK, the Navy is making a substantial commitment to NATO’s New Force Model – including our Carrier Strike Group – in addition to regular contributions to NATO operations.

    But we’re also operating on a smaller multi-lateral level, ramping up our collaboration with our partners in the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) which is the 10-nation coalition aiming to preserve peace in Northern Europe.

    Over the last year, the JEF has been at the forefront of providing military, economic and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

    Joint patrols, led by the British Type 23 frigate HMS Richmond, have been joined by Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian, and Danish ships, supported by Swedish and Danish fighter aircraft.

    And last year we held Exercise Cold Response near Norway, one of the biggest exercises in Europe since the end of the Cold War.

    We’re also strengthening our partnerships beyond Europe.

    In the Indo-Pacific, which we all know is one of the main strategic chokepoints in the world, we are persistently operating two ships to reassure allies and partners, while helping to uphold freedom of navigation in the region.

    By 2030, our five new Type-31 frigates will further enhance our global reach.

    And at an industrial level, the T-26 continues to garner interest in the export market, having already been selected for the Hunter class frigate programme in Australia and the Surface Combatant programme in Canada.

    But you and I know there is much more we can do.

    And one of my priorities will be to make sure we get even more out of our international ties both at an operational and industrial level.

    The three lessons I’ve outlined today – strengthening industry, encouraging innovation and bolstering partnerships – are embodied in what is our most powerful partnership of the last few decades – AUKUS.

    AUKUS is not just creating thousands of skilled jobs here in the UK, strengthening our industrial base.

    And it’s not just enabling the sharing of skills and expertise as we break new ground together on cutting-edge designs.

    But, crucially, it’s uniting three great allies as we work together to protect our common interests.

    That is the benchmark for the kind of deals we’re looking to make in the coming months and years.

    So, as I’ve said, we’re living at a dangerous time.

    A period of rising dangers.

    But some things have not changed.

    Our maritime power is as important as it has ever been.

    So we must do everything we can to enhance Sir Henry’s great legacy through industry, through innovation and through international partnerships.

    We must continue to channel his great willpower and his great belief in the values that underpin our daily lives.

    Because, if we do not, the warning he gave to Mrs Thatcher still holds true; “We shall be living in a different country whose word counts for little”.