Herald:Major defence review casts new shadow over Naval Base

#3
Re: Herald:Major defence review casts new shadow over Naval

Labour MP for Plymouth Devonport Alison Seabeck said: "In a sense there could be some value in this for Plymouth because there will no doubt be a reassessment of the needs and demand of the fleet, and as we have been saying we may not necessarily need lots of the top-end specialised vessels, which would have ended up in Portsmouth, and therefore a number of the more basic vessels could end up in Plymouth.
That is just one example of what could come out of this."
She added: "It is a high spending and complex department and it is clear from recent theatres of war that demands and needs of each of the services change quite rapidly for the different environments they are in.
I think it is important that we have this discussion and I think most people in the armed forces will welcome it."
Aw, bless. She must have given up some valuable shopping (or ironing) time to utter those profound words. Her assertion that “most people in the armed forces will welcome it†might be true if it was to be “requirement†led and not “budget†led. Surely we need a foreign policy review before any serious defence review?
 

big_nev

Midshipman
#4
Re: Herald:Major defence review casts new shadow over Naval

Perhaps a National Security Review is what is required instead of a Defence Review. This would better apportion the limited funds across all departments that have a role to play in national security. You have to agree that any form of review is long overdue.
 

Similar threads