Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 13
13
Rejected
Prioritising nuclear programmes risks squeezing conventional capability budgets, a recognised funding challenge.
Conclusion
The MoD’s prioritisation of the nuclear enterprise carries a risk that this will further squeeze budgets for conventional capabilities, because if additional money is not forthcoming, the MoD has the flexibility to redirect money from its conventional equipment budgets to nuclear programmes.40 However, HM Treasury recognises that it will be difficult for the MoD to fund fully its nuclear requirements through the reprioritisation of conventional capabilities, given that the forecast cost for conventional equipment is £9 billion more than the expected budget.41 38 Q 77; C&AG’s Report, para 2.17 39 Q 78; C&AG’s Report, para 2.15 40 Qq 80, 82; C&AG’s Report, para 2.19 41 C&AG’s Report, para 2.19 12 MoD Equipment Plan 2023–2033 2 Wider issues affecting the Equipment Plan Working with the supply chain
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.