During a Defence Committee session, Defence Secretary John Healey criticised the state of the Armed Forces housing, describing it as having been left in a “crippled state” after 14 years of underinvestment.
The discussion highlighted concerns about the Defence Infrastructure Organisation’s (DIO) recent admission that it would require at least £2 billion to bring the defence estate up to standard.
Michelle Scrogham, MP, cited the DIO chief executive’s description of the estate as “shocking,” asking Healey if meaningful improvements could be achieved without substantial capital investment. Healey acknowledged the severity of the issue, stating:
“The comment you cited is a reflection of the results of what hollowing out really means in practice over a period. When there are pressures, the things that very easily get put to the side are the long-term investments… They are perhaps more critical and more fundamental in defence than in many other services and departments.”
Healey stressed that infrastructure plays a vital role in supporting effective and ready Armed Forces, noting that the ongoing Strategic Defence Review (SDR) would prioritise this area. He remarked:
“I expect the reviewers to have a strong focus on the state of the infrastructure now and the critical role that it will play in the future.”
Healey was blunt about the mismanagement of recent funding. He pointed to the additional £400 million allocated in 2023-24 and 2024-25, which, he argued, was not effectively utilised:
“Officials have admitted to me that the money was not spent effectively. In particular, there are serious questions over the profile of that spending. Almost all the £180 million allocated for this financial year was effectively committed by the end of April.”
This left the Armed Forces with limited resources to address housing issues during winter, a time when demand is traditionally higher. Healey suggested the responsibility lay with previous Ministers, adding:
“There are some big questions to ask of previous Ministers about why it was managed in that way, why the spend was profiled in that way, and why that welcome fresh investment is not available for the large part of this financial year.”
David Williams, the Permanent Secretary, acknowledged the challenges, emphasising the need for consistent and sustained investment. He stated:
“Although we have allocated additional capital investment to the accommodation aspects of the estate over the last two years, it is short-term investment… We have not really begun to get the full effect of that money.”
Williams highlighted the importance of incorporating infrastructure funding into long-term plans:
“Baking in an appropriate level of capital investment for infrastructure generally, but for service accommodation in particular, will be an important part of how those plans are finalised.”
Lt Gen Sir Rob Magowan echoed the need for a preventive approach to maintenance and rationalisation of the estate, noting:
“We have been living on a sort of fix-on-fail approach to our single-living accommodation and service families’ accommodation. We have started to move to a preventive regime, but that is also going to involve increased investment.”
At the UK Defence Journal, we aim to deliver accurate and timely news on defence matters. We rely on the support of readers like you to maintain our independence and high-quality journalism. Please consider making a one-off donation to help us continue our work. Click here to donate. Thank you for your support!
Mr Healey like every current government minister blaming all our woes on the last 14 years. No reference to the previous Labour administration which was also just as bad. It’s all starting to sound like a broken record and a fallback excuse as to why they won’t be able to solve these issues. Get a grip man, if the jobs too much for you step aside and let someone more capable to step in.
Pretty much this. Endless whining.
There is money, they’ve committed it elsewhere or are sending it abroad.
Absolutely spot on, Housing for service famillies has always been pretty low down on ever Governments list of key things to spend money on. Another politician talking but never doing, just like the ones that have gone before. The only people lapping this up on this site are the leftwing diehards, who have never actually served or experienced accommodation, and dont particularily like the idea of the armed forces anyway.
Of course the 14-year line gets rolled out again, but that’s because that’s what happened. And before them, Blairite Labour not giving a toss is also what happened. Personally, I don’t think acknowledgement of either of those things makes one a leftwing diehard, nor does not having served mean I don’t think those that do should be able to rest their heads in decent housing.
The fact of the matter is, the response that was given – “can we fix it without spending money?” – is the same one that’s been received for as long as anyone enlisting today has been alive, regardless of who’s in No. 10. Half of it is because the Treasury has always been the MoD’s mortal enemy, but the other half is the MoD being addicted to gold-plated shinies at the expense of the basics.
Healey saying that infrastructure will be emphasised in the SDR is at least better than not admitting anything’s wrong at all. Talk is cheap, of course, and if it’s ignored and glossed over there then I can promise I’ll have my pitchfork at the ready, but until then – well, maybe the NHS needs money to check the heads of those expecting them to have solved the issues of the defence estate in not much more than 14 *weeks*.
The one good thing is Mr Healey has fully recognised their is a shocking mess to resolve. Which is the first big step to sorting out a problem. Hopefully Mr Healey can turn things around fast as housing issues is a quick fix considering the huge amount of skills in the private sector
I am a qualified building surveyor and I went for a job with vivo the mod contractors, they never wanted my 30 years experience or a keen eye, thats what’s going on the wrong people in the wrong jobs, I feel for people’s family’s that are in poor housing, the mod should copy the good home standards and have a annual target system to up grade there property’s, but this is the ugly word “MONEY ” but everyone deserves a safe house, property, to rent…. WR
As far as I am aware , at least some of the housing has been privatised to contract firms , signed under terrible contracts with no accountability . Hopefully Mr Healey will sort this out and not use as an excuse to wait for 4 years
Like everyone else I’m actually waiting for the government to actually fix something. They can only bang the 14 years block hole drum for so.long. yes it takes time to fix stuff bug doesn’t take long to assess and put a plan in place.
£2 billion to bring the defence estate up to standard. With a defence budget approaching £60 billion PA, over 3-5 years a couple of billion is loose change.
It doesn’t need more reviews and consultations or talk at defence committees…..just needs the work to crack on.
Recruitment and retention need to be shored as the priority.
They were trying to do away with the Pads estates anyway with the new FAM model which is never going to work
Talking to a guy who used to inspect mod housing.
The tender would be won by someone who didn’t want it but wanted their cut after selling it on and so on till the guys who do build them have to do it on the cheap.
So we pay twice the price for a quarter of the house we ordered
We train bricklayers plumbers and joiners – let the army build their own houses
Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn’t be cheaper to hire a couple of in-house plumbers, electricians etc at decent sized facilities to go round fixing, inspecting, and doing preventative maintenance. A friend of mine is a governor at a state school comprised mostly of pre-1970’s buildings, until about 10 years ago they had a full-time caretaker who could fix a lot of things himself and knew at least a bit about the things they had to get contractors in for, and kept an eye on them. They allowed him to retire without replacement as it reduced fixed payroll costs. Apparently within a couple of years costs had doubled because there was next to no preventative maintenance going on, when things broke suddenly they had to pay through the nose for emergency call outs, and work done was often of a poor standard or badly-coordinated between different contractors. And of course even if you use the same firm it’s a different bloke coming round each time so nobody builds up a picture of how the building works or quite what bodge was done by the previous guy.
As Dave C has said already, we already train people to do similar things, why not have our own cadre? There must also be a lot of people who develop medical conditions that mean they can no longer deploy, but might not want a desk job or to leave, why not retrain them to do something like this, with the added bonus that they’ll know the problems of the facilities already and won’t want others to suffer as they did.