Source · Select Committees · Defence Committee
Recommendation 82
82
Accepted
Lack of prioritisation in defence strategies leads to widespread, unfocused Armed Forces commitments
Conclusion
Professor Justin Bronk told us that the IR23 and DCP23 had demonstrated “the broad challenges and ambitions that the UK is faced with” but had given no indication of priority.175 We made the same criticism (which the Government rejected) of the 2021 strategies.176 This lack of prioritisation has resulted in leaders of the UK Armed Forces feeling the need to show the Services “doing things all over the place all the time”, otherwise “not only will they not get additional investment to plug gaps or increase capability, but they will risk being cut”.177 Professor Malcolm Chalmers told us that a number “of the issues around personnel in relation to the Army are about the breadth of their commitments”.178 General Lord Houghton agreed, telling us that “the Armed Forces are consistently on some form of operation. Not a lot of them are left at home, in the locker”.179
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the importance of prioritising resources and outlines existing mechanisms, such as continuous review with NATO allies, balancing the Global Operate programme with DCP23 outcomes, the Capability Readiness Assessment Framework (CRAF), and the Defence Design review, which aim to improve prioritisation within Defence.
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
Defence must prioritise resources to support both future modernisation and current readiness. We do this in concert with our Allies through NATO, continuously reviewing our priorities and capability plans to address shortfalls we have identified. As an example, the lessons from the Russia-Ukraine War have led to a re-evaluation of previous assumptions around capabilities and readiness. Until now the demands on the Department have allowed for the Global Operate programme to continue at pace. However, given the threat to Euro-Atlantic has increased, and the Department must now be more focused on warfighting readiness. The Department is taking forward work on balancing the Global Operate programme with delivery of the Priority Outcomes as detailed in the Defence Command Paper 23. In terms of readiness, the single Services classify military forces as being held at different levels of preparedness to respond to short- and long-term needs. At the heart of this work is the continuing evolution of the Capability Readiness Assessment Framework (CRAF). The CRAF process is intended to inform key 3* decision making forums and it should be optimised to support Balance of Investment work, informing options to prioritise spend and optimise capability in the 1–2 year horizon; support the Operational Policy and Requirements Group, informing options to rescope Defence ambition or change Defence priorities in the 0–1 year horizon; support the delivery of the Global Operate Programme, including the delivery of routine military strategic balance assessments and support the staffing of Defence Board Risks. In tandem, Defence Design is undertaking a review of our Defence Operating Model, one aspiration for this is for the Department to is better able to achieve the outcomes we have prioritised.