A recent question in Parliament has inexplicably clarified the government’s position on whether the Royal Navy should return to the two power standard.
Andrew Rosindell, the Conservative MP for Romford, asked the Ministry of Defence “whether he will make it his Department’s policy to reinstate the two-power standard as applied to the Royal Navy Fleet.” His question referenced the long standing benchmark used in the late nineteenth century to judge maritime strength.
In his reply, Parliamentary Under Secretary Al Carns explained that the measure originated in the Naval Defence Act of 1889. As set out in the written answer, the act required that “the Royal Navy should maintain a fleet at least as strong as the next two powerful navies combined.”
Carns added that the strategic environment shaping UK defence planning differs from that era. The response states that “today our security is underpinned by NATO’s collective defence, where capabilities are shared across 32 allies.”
Carns used the written answer to outline the government’s approach to fleet development. He wrote that “modern naval warfare still demands mass, presence, and resilience.” The Royal Navy is described as “transforming to a hybrid fleet, moving to a dispersed but digitally connected fleet of crewed, uncrewed, and autonomous platforms.” According to the department, that mix is intended to expand available mass and power in what it presents as a cost conscious way while sustaining capabilities associated with a front line NATO navy.
Well actually, it’s 31 allies in reality. The US is not an ally anymore .
Being in NATO is all well and good but not over dependence on it. The real difference from that era? Priorities, defence came first, without it you have nothing. No NHS, education, welfare, railways, nothing. A lesson I think this country will end up relearning the hard way. Lest we forget, seems to have been forgotten in my opinion.
Exactly, we could be in a serious situation without NATO. Plus having a large Navy does actually help with influence around the world.
I’m sure countries certainly feel influenced with a huge US carrier strike group off their coast. Ask Venezuela, apparently Maduro offered US companies more shares in Venzuelan oil.
Shame, It would be great to have 800 plus ships.
It wasn’t so long ago !
It would certainly help the unemployment rate I guess.
Well yes, exactly and hell what’s not to like about that too !!!
Just need some wars and new places to invade. I did see there were still 20 places the british have yet to invade !!!!
I can’t wait to see the Royal Navy go at it hammer and tongs with Mongolia
The Minister was actually saying we will downgrade the RN even further.
We don’t have any of ‘mass, presence, or resilience.’
I wonder what Rosindell would say if he was presented with the level of investment necessary for the Royal Navy to have more ships than the US and China combined?
This far-left government is only interested in disarming the armed forces; they will not order a single additional ship, plane, or tank. On the contrary, they only plan to withdraw equipment.
This government is not far-left and you have to be deluded to think so. They’re cut international aid, not giving into all the strikes that happen, want to cut welfare and other decisions. They’re awful but not far left.
What a ridiculous comment showing your ignorance
The UK should maintain the largest navy in Europe and third largest navy in the world (by tonnage) . We are not far off those metrics at the moment and we currently have the second most capable blue water navy although China is rapidly getting to the point of over taking that.
Neither the USA or China maintain a two power standard, it’s an unachievable goal.
We should aim for 30 surface combatants 20 nuclear submarines, two carriers and 6 amphibious ships. With 7 large RFA vessels plus four large ferries.
Probably around 1 million tonnes all in.
The government should aim to develop a force able to defeat the Russian navy on its own in the Atlantic while simultaneously maintaining a substantial Taskforce supported by Allie’s in the Indian Ocean.
That force is very achievable with the resources the government has promised and more importantly the industrial base Britain has been re developing.
Morning Jim, that would be nice having all those ships, maybe you can ask RR next time you meet up with her ? 🤔😁
Well this is strange, but it IS the same guy who wanted the surface fleet converted to nuclear power so at least he has form.
Ah, so it’s a 0.03125 power standard then.
He’s correct about NATO, but HMG are also using that as an excuse.
We were a NATO member In 1997 when 32 Escorts was seen as a minimum.
Explain THAT, Mr Carns.
And there it is again, the reference or optimally crewed as an excuse for real mass of actual warships able to self deploy for tasking, be it in the GIUK or elsewhere.
I recall hearing a comment made shortly after the Second World War. Where an American officer asked a RN officer “what’s it like being the second biggest navy in the world” to which the RN officer responded “not bad actually, what is it like for you being the second best?”
Classic! Just to lighten the mood here 🙂
April 1 seems to have arrived several months early in La La Land.
Perhaps they could still have it, if they get to choose the two powers: say Ireland and Honduras.