PLANS for new warships, planes and armoured vehicles could be put at risk because of concerns about the Ministry of Defence's ability to find more than £7 billion in savings, a parliamentary committee has warned.
MPs on the Commons Defence Committee said they "seriously doubt" the MoD's ability to make the necessary savings as it had proved incapable of doing so in the past.
The cross-party group backed the findings of spending watchdog the National Audit Office that the defence equipment plan was at "greater risk" than at any time since 2012.
The £178bn plan set out in 2016 involves spending over 10 years on equipment including eight Type 26 frigates for the Royal Navy, new mechanised infantry vehicles and nine Boeing P-8A maritime patrol aircraft.
But it rests on finding £7.3bn of efficiency savings, on top of £7.1bn previously announced, and the MPs are concerned about the MoD's ability to "generate efficiencies on the scale required to deliver the equipment plan or detail how it would proceed to do so".
"Even if all the efficiencies are realised, there will be little room for manoeuvre, in the absence of sufficient financial 'headroom' and contingency funding," the MPs warned.
"This is not an adequate basis for delivering major projects at the heart of the UK's defence capability."
The committee's Tory chairman, Julian Lewis, said: "It is extremely doubtful that the MoD can generate even more efficiencies from within its already stretched budget on the scale required to deliver its equipment plan.
"This will inevitably lead either to a reduction in the numbers of ships, aircraft and vehicles or to even greater delays in their acquisition."
The committee's report is published against a backdrop of Tory unease about the prospect of cuts to military spending as part of a security capability review being carried out by National Security Adviser Mark Sedwill.
A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "In the face of intensifying threats our £178bn equipment plan continues to deliver the cutting-edge kit to keep the UK safe.
"As we told the Defence Committee, we are making good progress towards our efficiency target.
"We always look to provide the best value for money for the taxpayer, with all savings reinvested in defence."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel