ISSUE AREAS:

As public spending belts tighten, costly dreams of force projection are protected

BASIC Press Release

Embargo: Monday 8 October 2007, 10pm

While spending on public services is to be tightened in the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), public money is being wasted on new carriers and Trident submarines irrelevant to the security threats facing Britain. A new report to be published on Tuesday 9 October, The Real Cost Behind Trident Replacement and the Carriers calculates the annual cost of the two systems to be at least £5bn over their lifetimes, yet there has been no discussion over the opportunity costs. The Government claimed in the debate over Trident replacement that conventional defence procurement and social projects would not suffer. But defence spending in particular, and the public purse in general, is clearly under pressure.

Ian Davis, Co-Executive Director of BASIC said: “Our report outlines the extent of the pain caused by decisions to go ahead with these sacred cow projects. It is not too late for the government to delay or abandon them. The money would be better spent on a ‘comprehensive security’ package, including measures to reduce Britain’s carbon emissions and oil dependency, increased peacekeeping, and conflict prevention, overseas development aid and nuclear non-proliferation. Such targeted spending would provide real security benefits as opposed to feeding grand illusions”.

The report's authors, Prof Paul Dunne, Dr Samuel Perlo-Freeman and Paul Ingram, calculate that the annual opportunity cost of replacing Britain’s Trident nuclear submarines and building two new aircraft carriers is £5bn over the lifetime of the projects. They also highlight the purpose of the systems – as force projection rather than to build genuine security. The decisions to go ahead with the carriers and the replacement submarines have not accounted for the opportunity costs of doing so, both to the need for other more appropriate defence equipment, or to public spending pressures elsewhere.

The report details how £5bn per annum could deliver:

(a) 1.2 pence off the basic rate of income tax; or
(b) the capital and running costs of around 200 new hospitals; or
(c) the capital and running costs of around 1,000 new secondary schools in moderate/high cost areas, with 1,000 pupils each; or
(d) £10-11 per week real increase in the basic state pension.

The report also details how, alternatively, £5bn could be used to meet an illustrative Comprehensive Security Package - one that focuses on a combination of military security (tackling ‘overstretch’ in the army, more money for peacekeeping etc) and broader security spending in relation to combating climate change and reducing the UK's energy insecurity (raising renewable energy R&D to level of nuclear R&D in late 1980s, increased fiscal and capital support for renewable energy technologies, measures to reduce oil use in transport etc), improving conflict prevention and accelerating Cooperative Threat Reduction.

NOTES TO EDITORS

The CSR, to be announced on Tuesday 9 October, will formally give the spending settlements for government departments over the next three years. Negotiations have been bitter, with budgets tighter than in previous years.

The protection of these two projects will inevitably mean cuts in the rest of the RN Navy, and decommissioning of ships. This was confirmed in a recently leaked memo between the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence.

Comments from service chiefs about the decision appear to show greater concern for prestige than any attention to the real security needs of the country. Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, the First Sea Lord, is reported to have said the decision to build the carriers meant that Britain remained "big boys in the navy league".

For more information or a copy of the report please contact:
Paul Ingram (Senior Analyst) 020 7324 4680; mobile: 07908 708175
Ian Davis (Director) mobile: 07887 782389

ENDS