Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 12
12
Rejected
MoD nuclear programmes are healthier but future funding requests for HM Treasury remain possible.
Conclusion
The MoD said that its nuclear programmes are in a much healthier position than for many years.37 The MoD has agreed a minimum 10-year budget with HM Treasury for its nuclear activities of £109.8 billion, and it said that the £7.9 billion deficit in the 26 C&AG’s Report, para 1.3 27 Qq 24, 25 28 Q 26; C&AG’s Report, para 1.12 29 C&AG’s Report, para 1.13 30 Qq 24, 25 31 House of Lords, Ministry of Defence: Equipment Plan, volume 834, 7 December 2023 32 Q 26 33 Qq 27, 65 34 Q 26 35 C&AG’s Report, paras 16, 2.16 36 Q 12; C&AG’s Report, para 2.17 37 Q 78 MoD Equipment Plan 2023–2033 11 nuclear budget compared to forecast costs was broadly manageable.38 However, the MoD acknowledged that it cannot rule out asking HM Treasury for more money for nuclear programmes in future planning rounds.39
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the committee's observation regarding the nuclear budget, stating that speculating on future funding shifts from conventional to nuclear is unhelpful for planning, and nuclear funding is ringfenced.
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
3.1 The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. 3.2 The Defence Nuclear Enterprise (DNE) comprises a range of interdependent programmes to support, maintain and renew the United Kingdom’s independent nuclear deterrent as well as the decommissioning and disposal activities for defence nuclear capabilities when they leave service. Funding for these programmes is ringfenced within the defence budget with a contingency fund for the Dreadnought submarine programme also available in year. 3.3 If the conventional equipment plan budget is impacted by the need to provide additional funding for the nuclear equipment plan, then the department will make that clear. However, the department believes that to go further and hypothesise on whether there might be a requirement in the future to move funding from the conventional into the nuclear equipment plan would be wholly speculative and would not be a useful basis for planning.