Former Tory defence minister admits UK does not have ‘credible’ plans to mobilise volunteers in event of war
James Heappey, who was a defence minister for the whole of the last parliament, told Times Radio in an interview this morning that that figures about 10,000 members of the armed forces not being medically fit were “very arresting” and a matter of concern. But he also played down the significance of the findings, saying that the figures would include many people deemed unfit just because they had missed dental checks, and that other people with injuries could be deployed in a war. He explained:
Firstly, I’ll bet you that a big chunk of the non-deployable, medically downgraded people are downgraded for dental reasons. And what that tends to mean is that they’ve not had a dental check-up in the last six months, and so they are automatically declared dentally unfit, and therefore not fully deployable.
Secondly, there is a reality about the nature of some of these injuries that mean that they couldn’t deploy to go on a discretionary operation today in peacetime, but if war was to come, then they would be absolutely able to go and fight because the needs of the nation would rather trump that rather discretionary take on their medical capacity.
Al Carns, the former solidier who was immediately made a defence minister after being elected to parliament in the election, disclosed the figures in a parliamentary written answer. According to today’s Times story, Carns also angered No 10 when he gave a speech recently saying the entire army could be wiped out within six months in the event of a Ukraine-style conflict.
In his Times Radio interview, Heappey said Carns was right to say what he did.
In 1914 the British Expeditionary Force was defeated inside the first year and it was a sort of volunteer, conscript army that went on to win the war subsequently.
In 1939, the standing professional army was defeated within a year and onto the beaches of Dunkirk, and then it was a volunteer conscript army, second and third echelon army, that went on to win the war.
So Al is not yet really a fully credentialled politician, he is a senior military officer and he says it exactly as it is. And nobody should find that particularly salacious, those are the realities.
Heappey, who stood down as an MP at the election, also said Britain needed better plans to mobilise volunteers in the event of full-scale war because the current ones weren’t “credible”.
History tells us that the army, navy, air force that starts a war never is the one that finishes it, and at the moment I don’t think the UK has particularly credible plans for developing that second and third echelon that will prove decisive in any national war.
Key events
Lunchtime summary
-
Heappey, who was a defence minister for almost five years until the election, has said that the UK does not have credible plans to mobilise volunteers in the event of a war. (See 10.28am.)
Anthony Barnett, the co-founder of openDemocracy and veteran campaigner for progressive change in Britain since the days of Charter 88, is not impressed by Pat McFadden’s interview with HuffPost UK today. (See 10.47am.) He posted this on Bluesky.
To govern is to choose. But here is the apparently hugely influential McFadden saying that to govern is “not” to choose! It captures the continued disaster of the Starmer government.
The National Farmers’ Union has announced that it will hold a “day of unity” on Saturday 25 January to allow people to show support for its campaign to stop the extension of inheritance tax to cover farms. Its sister organisations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are also involved. On that day, its says, “towns in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, from Land’s End to Shetland and from the Giant’s Causeway to Dover, will see farmers gathering to thank the British public for their overwhelming support, and to underline to their parliamentarians that our campaign will not stop until the tax is finally subject to consultation and proper scrutiny.”
In its manifesto Labour said it would “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations to political parties”. There has been renewed interest in what this might mean since Elon Musk, the tech billionaire and Trump ally, starting floating the prospect of giving to Reform UK – although, as Michael Savage reported in the Observer at the weekend, ministers are worried about acting too quickly in case it looks as if they are only bothered about stopping the Musk donation.
Under current rules, despite being a foreigner, Musk could donate to a British political party via a company that he owns in the UK because donations from UK-based companies are permissible. One proposal is to tighten this law so that a firm would have to show that it was donating money actually raised in the UK, and not just siphoning corporate earnings from abroad.
As Pippa Crerar reported last week, this is one of three main changes to tighten laws on what donations are allowed proposed by the Electoral Commission.
But David Howarth, a former Lib Dem MP and a former member of the electoral commission (a member of the board overseeing its work) has written a good article for the Democracy for Sale Substack blog saying that saying just changing the law applying to donations won’t be enough because the rules are full of other loopholes. It is worth reading in full, but here is an extract.
Spending controls apply only during officially defined election campaign periods. Most of the time, parties can spend unlimited amounts. But we now live in an era of constant campaigning. The concept of a separate campaign period is meaningless.
Even during official campaign periods some important types of spending escape control. Spending on staff by national parties does not count, so that, for example, the costs of making national party online videos almost completely disappear if done in-house. And some kinds of election spending during the campaign by non-party organisations are exempt.
Most strikingly, campaign expenditure, even if aimed at supporting a specific candidate, avoids all electoral law if made by a newspaper, so that the easiest way for billionaires lawfully to influence British elections is via the press.
Another problem is enforcement. Constituency spending limits are enforced not through the Electoral Commission but either by expensive court proceedings or by a largely uninterested criminal justice system. Enforcement action by this route is vanishingly rare.
Given this is the last time I will be writing the blog this year, I would like to thank all of you who read it and, in particularly everyone who contributes – either as a supporter or a subscriber, which keeps us financially afloat, or by making comments below the line (BTL), which keeps us mentally and editorially afloat. I really on feedback BTL probably a lot more than you realise, I often learn a lot from what you have to say, and the challenge and criticism undoubtedly makes the blog sharper and better than it otherwise would be. So thank you. I won’t be back until Monday 6 January. There may be some blogs next week, by colleagues, if there is enough news to keep them going, but we will see what the News Gods offer. In the meantime, have a joyous Christmas, and a happy and fufilling new year.
There are more than one million households in England with at least one child under the age of 16 facing fuel poverty at Christmas, the Liberal Democrats have said.
In a news release, they say government figures show that households with children are significantly more likely to be fuel poor than other households. They say:
Figures for 2023 show there are 1.08m fuel-poor households with children aged 15 or under in England. Households with children under 16 are disproportionately impacted by fuel poverty. The party’s analysis reveals that 17.6% of households with children are fuel poor, compared to 11.4% of households without children under 16.
Overall, 13% of households in England were in fuel poverty in 2023. The regions most affected by fuel poverty were the West Midlands (19.5% of households) and Yorkshire and the Humber (16.4%).
Being in fuel poverty is defined as being below the poverty line (below 60% of median household income) after heating costs are deducted.
The Liberal Democrats say these figures highlight the need for better home insulation. Pippa Heylings, a Lib Dem energy spokesperson, said:
It is shameful that over a million families with children are facing a Christmas in the cold and living in fuel poverty.
The former Conservative government’s appalling legacy has left people with sky-high energy bills and leaky homes.
This cannot continue, every family deserves a warm safe home. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for an emergency home insulation programme this winter to ensure people don’t have to choose between eating and heating.
Car industry welcomes UK review of electric car targets
The Department for Transport has today launched a consultation on how to phase out the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030. The previous government originally set 2030 as a deadline, but in September last year Rishi Sunak said he was pushing the deadline back to 2035, as one of various measures he was announcing watering down the impact of net zero rules. In its manifesto Labour said it would restore the 2030 target.
Announcing the consultation, the DfT says:
The 2030 phase out date was broadly supported by industry before the previous UK government extended the phase out to 2035. Currently more than two-thirds of car manufacturers in the UK, including Nissan and Stellantis, have already committed to fully transitioning to electric cars by 2030 …
This consultation is focused on how, not if, we reach the 2030 target. It will give the sector the opportunity to consider how the current arrangements and flexibilities are working, which hybrid cars can be sold alongside zero emission models between 2030 and 2035, and any further support measures to help make the transition a success for industry and consumers.
As Graeme Wearden reports in his business live blog, the automotive industry has welcomed the consultation.
Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister, has insisted that it would be a mistake for Britain to make a binary choice and align with the US, not the EU, as Tories suggest.
After Keir Starmer sad in his recent Lord Mayor’s Banquet speech that it was just “plain wrong” to think that Britain had to choose either America or Europe, the Conservatives said the UK should be focusing on the US, because that would be better for growth.
The Tory argument is in part driven by hostility to the EU, with Brexiters sounding increasingly alarmist in recent weeks about Starmer’s plans to improve post-Brexit trading rules with the EU.
In an interview with HuffPost UK, McFadden criticised those who were just interested in “perpetually giving two fingers” to the EU and said the government would decide policy in the national interest.
Referring to the binary choice argument, he said:
Our relationship with the United States is going to be absolutely critical in the coming years. For example, when it comes to security we will always be with the US.
But when it comes to trade we are an open, trading economy that has to have relationships with the US, with the European Union and with China. This thing that you’ve got to choose is wrong.
Britain has succeeded in the past precisely by not choosing, by making sure it’s got a good relationship with the US and a good relationship with Europe.
Can we do things to make life easier for industry? Let’s see. But whatever we do, it will be in the UK’s national interests. And I think that to try and shut that down before we begin and say ‘you’ve got the close the door to Europe and only think about America’ is to limit Britain’s options in a way that isn’t in our national interest.
Former Tory defence minister admits UK does not have ‘credible’ plans to mobilise volunteers in event of war
James Heappey, who was a defence minister for the whole of the last parliament, told Times Radio in an interview this morning that that figures about 10,000 members of the armed forces not being medically fit were “very arresting” and a matter of concern. But he also played down the significance of the findings, saying that the figures would include many people deemed unfit just because they had missed dental checks, and that other people with injuries could be deployed in a war. He explained:
Firstly, I’ll bet you that a big chunk of the non-deployable, medically downgraded people are downgraded for dental reasons. And what that tends to mean is that they’ve not had a dental check-up in the last six months, and so they are automatically declared dentally unfit, and therefore not fully deployable.
Secondly, there is a reality about the nature of some of these injuries that mean that they couldn’t deploy to go on a discretionary operation today in peacetime, but if war was to come, then they would be absolutely able to go and fight because the needs of the nation would rather trump that rather discretionary take on their medical capacity.
Al Carns, the former solidier who was immediately made a defence minister after being elected to parliament in the election, disclosed the figures in a parliamentary written answer. According to today’s Times story, Carns also angered No 10 when he gave a speech recently saying the entire army could be wiped out within six months in the event of a Ukraine-style conflict.
In his Times Radio interview, Heappey said Carns was right to say what he did.
In 1914 the British Expeditionary Force was defeated inside the first year and it was a sort of volunteer, conscript army that went on to win the war subsequently.
In 1939, the standing professional army was defeated within a year and onto the beaches of Dunkirk, and then it was a volunteer conscript army, second and third echelon army, that went on to win the war.
So Al is not yet really a fully credentialled politician, he is a senior military officer and he says it exactly as it is. And nobody should find that particularly salacious, those are the realities.
Heappey, who stood down as an MP at the election, also said Britain needed better plans to mobilise volunteers in the event of full-scale war because the current ones weren’t “credible”.
History tells us that the army, navy, air force that starts a war never is the one that finishes it, and at the moment I don’t think the UK has particularly credible plans for developing that second and third echelon that will prove decisive in any national war.
Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch release their Christmas messages
Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch have both released their Christmas messages.
Starmer has been described as Britain’s first openly atheist prime minister. “I am not of faith, I don’t believe in God – but I can see the power of faith and the way it brings people together,” he told a journalist in 2021. (Humanists UK argue that there were several previous PMs who were just as atheist as this.) But his message today has a conventional, Christian-lite tone, mentioning Jesus and stressing the importance of caring for others.
Here’s an extract.
I’d like especially to thank those who will spend their Christmas serving others this year. In our NHS and emergency services, our armed forces and the churches and charities that will welcome every person this Christmas.
Because I know that this is not an easy time for everyone, and my thoughts are with all those who are lonely this Christmas. Having a tough time, missing a loved one. You are not alone.
Because as Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, the Christmas story reminds all of us to reach out to one another. To care for one another. And to look after those around us.
And here is the video.
As we come together to celebrate the hope and joy of this special season, I wish you a very happy Christmas.
The Christmas story reminds us to care and look after those around us — I send my heartfelt thanks to those who are spending Christmas serving others. pic.twitter.com/SYUeZ4fqJ8
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) December 24, 2024
Badenoch is also a non-believer, although she describes herself as a “cultural Christian”. According to the recent biography of her by Lord Ashcroft, she lost her faith after reading about the story of Elisabeth Fritzl, who was held captive in an Austrian cellar for 24 years and repeatedly raped by her father. Learning that Elisabeth had prayed to be rescued, Badenoch concluded she could not believe in a God who would ignore prayers like that.
In her message, Badenoch sounds a bit more upbeat than Starmer. And she also stresses the importance of thinking about others.
Here’s an extract.
I think that Christmas is a time for us to reflect on all that’s happened in the year.
Sometimes we have amazing years.
Sometimes, like when I lost my dad, we have difficulty years and we’re commiserating, but we do it together.
But it’s a time for us to support all of those people who need our assistance, who need our help, who need our support. And that’s one of the best things about Christmas, that it isn’t just about all of the things that we love and want to do, but thinking about other people.
And here’s the video.
The festive season is a time for celebration, joy and spending time with loved ones.
It is also a time for reflection, and keeping in our thoughts those who may find this time of year difficult or lonely, and those who are sacrificing their Christmas to look after others.… pic.twitter.com/xivM6j7wNV
— Kemi Badenoch (@KemiBadenoch) December 24, 2024
Mark Francois, the shadow defence minister, told the Times that urgent action was needed to increase the size of the armed forces, and improve the fitness of people already serving, in the light of the figures it has revealed about the number of service personnel not fit to fight. (See 9.25am.) He said:
Not only has the army now shrunk to just over 71,000 soldiers, almost 2,000 below its established strength [but] of those, almost a quarter are not medically fully deployable.
This requires urgent action, not just regarding recruitment and retention but also remedial action, especially physiotherapy, to ensure our remaining soldiers are truly fighting fit.
More than 10,000 members of armed forces not fit to fight, MoD figures show
Good morning. With almost no live politics news, Christmas Eve isn’t the best day for a politics live blog, but Christmas is also the season for presents – offerings prepared and wrapped in advance – and there are some good ones around this morning.
At the Guardian, we are splashing on Anna Isaac’s story saying Thames Water intentionally diverted millions of pounds pledged for environmental clean-ups towards other costs including bonuses and dividend.
And, at the Times, Larisa Brown, the defence editor, has a story saying that one fifth of members of the armed forces cannot be relied upon to fight for health reasons. She reports.
More than 10,000 serving sailors, soldiers and aviators cannot go to war because they have been declared medically unfit, it can be revealed.
In addition, nearly 15,000 troops can only be deployed if the mission meets certain criteria, such as the weather is not too hot or too cold and they are not exposed to noise …
Nearly a quarter of soldiers and officers in the regular army cannot engage in combat without any restrictions and nearly 3,000 sailors are deemed unfit to go to sea under any circumstances.
In the case of the army, 16,335 soldiers are either “medically not deployable” or “medically limited deployable”, out of a total of 71,340 personnel, amounting to 23 per cent of all troops.
The figures come from a parliamentary written answer from Al Carns, the veterans minister to a question posed by Mark Francois, a shadow defence minister.
In its version of the story, PA Media reports:
Service personnel with medical conditions or fitness issues which affect their ability to perform their duties will generally be referred to a medical board for a medical examination and review of their medical grading.
They may be downgraded, to allow for treatment, recovery and rehabilitation and deployability status can be awarded on a temporary or permanent basis.
Deployable is defined as personnel who are able to deploy on operations. Some personnel may have medical limitations which restrict the type or location of operation they can be deployed on.
MoD statistics from April 2024 showed the army fell below its target size for the first time since it was set, meaning all three service branches are currently below target: the Army by 1%, the RN/RM by 5% and the RAF by 10%.
Overall, the UK armed forces were 5,440 personnel (1%) below target.
Commenting on the figures, the Ministry of Defence said:
The vast majority of our service personnel – around 90% – are deployable at any point, with most of the remaining members of our Armed Forces employed in wider military roles. We are committed to providing world-class medical treatment to ensure personnel can return to duty where possible, or to support their transition to civilian life.
I will be wrapping up other bits of pre-Christmas politics news, in so far as there is any, as the morning goes on. But we will be closing around lunchtime.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
