Up next in 10
John Healey and Al Carns have heaped new pressure on Sir Keir Starmer's premiership as they resigned over the controversial defence spending plan. The investment plan, which is due to be unveiled soon, is slated to improve Britain's defence against emerging threats. Mr Healey, a long-time ally of the Prime Minister, resigned after claiming the money in the defence investment plan would not be sufficient to defend the UK. To discuss the topic, Matthew Wright is joined by to guests who specialise in military strategy and decision making. 0:22 | Simon Diggins, former British army officer 04:39 | Gwythian Prins, former advisor to NATO Listen to the full show on the all-new LBC App: https://app.af.lbc.co.uk/btnc/thenewlbcapp #MatthewWright #UK #UKNews #UKPolitics #News #Politics #War #Army #Defence #Labour #Government #Debate #Opinion #LBC LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs in the UK. Join in the conversation and listen at https://www.lbc.co.uk/ Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: https://l-bc.co/signup
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:00
Is it cuts? Is that the way out
0:02
If not, how else do we fund our military? In a little while, I'll be catching up with Professor Gwythian Prins
0:09
but I'm joined first by Simon Diggins, former British Army officer, now a defence and security yst
0:13
also contributing editor of the Defence on the Brink campaign group. Nice to see you again, Simon. Good morning
0:20
Good morning. How do we increase funding for our military, sir? Well, I mean, technically, there's only a number of ways you can do it
0:27
you can tax, you can cut other departments, you could grow the economy
0:32
therefore you could have everything, or you could borrow. And all of them have got different limitations in terms of what you're trying to do
0:38
The kind of mix you use will depend on the circumstances and depends on the state of the economy
0:43
In that respect, Keir Starmer was not incorrect to what he said
0:47
He talked about the challenges of if you cut in one area, if you spend money in one area, where do you cut another
0:55
He's not wrong in saying that. And that's the perpetual dilemma that any department has, but particularly a department like defence, where you're spending money and there's not necessarily obviously an output from it, except for perhaps nebulous, the idea of deterrence
1:11
And then if you'll seem to be strong, then another country who might be aggressive towards you will be deterred and not attack you
1:18
So I recognise the challenge and I recognise the issue. And I also absolutely recognise, and of course I'm somebody who does believe we should increase our defence budget, but I also recognise there are opportunity costs involved in so doing
1:30
And I think that's the kind of responsible and correct way to approach this from there
1:35
But I think we can be more imaginative. I mean, you mentioned very briefly there the idea of defence bonds
1:41
There's also, and there's also, if I may, just very, very briefly, there are a number of kind of multilateral loan organisations, which are starting to develop what you might call international defence banks, not for profit, but basically designed to increase and raise money that way as well
1:58
So I think that's the kind of mix we actually need. An incredibly fair and balanced response. How important, Simon, is the British public's sense of danger or awareness
2:14
I mean, I looked at our preparedness in World War Two and you can argue we were late, but there was a massive rush to get ready as quickly as possible
2:27
it took us into the start of world war ii but we've got russia's already invaded ukraine
2:35
dropping uh drones into romania and nato member already and yet by and large most people i speak to here in this country haven got any sense that we face any danger at all
2:48
No, I think you put your finger on it. I think both as a people, but also even the political class
2:54
are not necessarily convinced. I listened yesterday to Debbie Abraham's MP, who was chair of the House of Commons Pensions and Work Committee
3:03
and when she was challenged on this particular issue, she talked about being an evidence-based politician
3:07
and she kind of wants to see the evidence. So I think even at the political level, there's not been a proper understanding of the threat
3:14
And the way in which Putin operates, particularly, because he's not the only threat that we have to counter
3:18
but let's deal with him to begin with. But the other way he operates, it's always a slightly sub-threshold
3:25
So it's Russian submarines kind of parked over the top of our undersea cables
3:30
It's Russian reconnaissance aircraft probing into UK airspace and then turning round
3:36
It's unattributable drones. And bear in mind, it wasn't just drones into Romania. We had drones over Dublin Airport
3:42
I mean, that's how close this is to ourselves. And then you have the whole aspect of what the head of MI5 described
3:51
as the Russian military intelligence going feral across Europe with sabotage attacks, which we've had in this country
3:58
and all sorts of other things done, often done by proxies, by criminal gangs and so forth
4:04
So very difficult to attribute to that. But I think there is a requirement to talk to the British people
4:10
and really explain to them what the level of threat is. And, of course, you rightly give the example of World War II
4:16
but, you know, this is not how the war is. I mean, one of your journalist colleagues said to me the other day
4:20
he said, we're already at war. I said, I can't agree with you. It doesn't feel like World War II
4:25
I think that's one of the challenges. I am, again, inclined to agree with your every word
4:30
Simon Diggins, pleasure as always. Let's bring in Professor Gwythian Prins now
4:34
nice to see you, former advisor to NATO. How do we improve funding for our military
4:41
Where do we start? Good morning. Let's pick up what Colonel Diggins was saying
4:50
Feeling the fear, it's a point you just made in your introduction
4:54
and you just discussed with him. If you don't know that you're at war
4:58
then, of course, you won't justify the things that have to be done. largely our population doesn't understand that we're at war of course we are at war
5:06
you are confident we are at war now i will just explain to you why we're at war
5:11
we're not in a hot war we're not in a war with drones flying around except occasionally as he
5:19
pointed out the belgara this huge submarine uh designed to among other things cut out undersea cables and pipelines and so on was spotted last month But that not the point It a three war War in the 21st century
5:36
comes hot, cold, and grey. So there's hot war, like Ukraine and the war in the Middle East
5:44
There is cold war, which we're familiar with, which is economic warfare, which is tariff warfare
5:51
its blockades and so on. But grey warfare is the one that people were most under attack with
5:59
The director of GCHQ, the spook centre, made an extraordinary speech a week and a half ago
6:07
in which she said that, you used the word feral, and it's not wrong, the intelligence
6:13
the aggressive intelligence services of China and Russia are running through this country at a scale
6:19
that we've never seen before. But most people are not aware because, as you say, in Buckfastly, it doesn't feel like that
6:27
So you've got to understand that. And then if you're a country like Israel or Ukraine
6:33
who feel the fear, you will do the first thing we have to do, which is to basically blow up the Ministry of Defence
6:39
in its present form. It's completely unfit for purpose. There is a thing called Parkinson's Law
6:45
which remains true to this day, which is that there's an inverse relationship. he said in the interwar years
6:51
between the number of battleships in the Navy and civil servants in the Admiralty
6:57
And we now have almost no ships and huge numbers of civil servants
7:00
We have to get rid of them. You have to get rid of Abbey Wood, the place where they do procurement, completely
7:05
May I ask, you see, you've done a great job of explaining the threat that the country is under
7:14
but you're not sitting in Downing Street. So are you looking to Keir Starmer or whoever may lead this country
7:23
are you looking to them to talk us into a war mindset
7:29
Yes, of course. It's telling truth to power, for heaven's sakes. If you don't tell..
7:37
Look, the British people, actually, I have much more confidence in them, frankly
7:42
People know this, and I know that, because when I go out and I go and fix my car in the garage
7:47
or I talk to the gardener or something, people are talking about these sorts of things
7:52
You know that. I used to live in Devon myself. And so Devon is a good sort of litmus test for deep Britain
8:02
But let's hurry along here. So the first thing is feel the fear The second is restructure the recipient of the money that you going to produce so that it used properly And I tell you if we got time how we can make a quick
8:16
fix. But then you've got to find the money. Now, you mentioned, and so did Colonel Diggins, the
8:23
period just before the Second World War. It is quite instructive. I think so. In 1936, let's just
8:29
get it very precise. In 1936, the Committee of Imperial Defence had a military committee
8:36
which was chaired by the then first Sea Lord, Admiral Chatfield. And in January of 36
8:41
Chatfield produced his annual requirements report, which was subject to a cap that was set by the
8:47
Treasury. That sounds very familiar. Then two things happened, the invasion of Abyssinia and
8:53
Hitler invading the Rhineland. So in July, he demanded another from Baldwin, the Prime Minister
8:58
He said, I've got to do another review without reference to costs
9:03
The Treasury, of course, went completely bananas, but he did it. And then Baldwin left and Neville Chamberlain came in
9:11
Neville Chamberlain, who everybody criticizes the appeal. If Neville Chamberlain had not backed that plan, we would not have had Chain Home
9:19
We wouldn't have had the Spitfire program. We wouldn't have had the battleships. We wouldn't have had the aircraft carriers
9:25
in other words, Churchill would not have had the tools with which to do the job. Now, that's our
9:30
ogous position. So where are we today? The situation today is that we spend, if you add these
9:37
things together, if you add the money we spend on our nationalised health service, where we have
9:41
just doubled the amount we put in and where it is generally agreed by experts that for that doubling
9:48
most of which seems to have gone into bureaucracy and not to the frontline, we are not getting
9:52
improved health outcomes. Then we have hyper welfare. This means people self-diagnosing
9:59
themselves as anxious and managing to get themselves onto benefits which are..
10:03
You can't get onto benefits with self-diagnosis of anxiety. That's just not true
10:08
Well, it is... It's just not true. Well, explain in that case how we have got a four times increase in the number of people
10:20
who are in these positions. We've gone from one quarter to four and a half
10:24
One explanation I could throw at you is that during COVID, at the end of COVID
10:29
we had a review about how much money we would need to invest in the children whose education
10:34
had been disrupted by COVID. The United States found £1,950 a child
10:40
Holland found £2,500 a child. And we found just over £50 a child
10:45
Professor Gwythian Prince, pleasure talking to you. how do we fund our military
10:51
Are you ready for more cuts
#news