An additional £470 million is being spent on improving the security of critical military sites across Britain, alongside £240 million for an enhanced counter-drone system called Project PRESAGIUM, according to an answer given in Parliament.
Stuart Anderson, the Conservative member for South Shropshire, asked what progress had been made on building resilience to attacks and shocks since the Strategic Defence Review was published.
Luke Pollard, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry, said: “Defence is strengthening the UK’s resilience to attacks and shocks through a range of measures, including an additional £470 million investment to improve the security of critical military sites across the UK. This is supportive of broader home defence planning to ensure the resilience of the UK’s most important CNI in the event of a crisis or conflict. We are working across Government in support of the Cabinet Office-led Home Defence Programme, to take a data-driven approach to identifying the CNI most essential to the UK’s ability to sustain and respond to conflict. By contributing Defence data to the Cabinet Office’s CNI Knowledge Base, we are fulfilling the commitments set out in the Resilience Action Plan and improving our understanding of the infrastructure, dependencies and vulnerabilities that would be most critical in a conflict scenario.
“This analysis is informing our Home Defence planning by ensuring that we align Defence resources and capabilities to the protection of the most important infrastructure against a broad spectrum of threats, from hybrid activity through to conventional conflict. It will also help to identify what Defence could contribute to support the protection of other priority CNI that is essential to the functioning of the country.
“Through the Defence Investment Plan and the wider Home Defence Programme, we are also investing in capabilities including Integrated Air and Missile Defence. Defence is investing £240m in Project PRESAGIUM, an enhanced counter-drone system, providing effective detection and defeat of emerging drone threats. We are growing and equipping the Reserves to support Homeland Defence tasks and enhancing capabilities to protect critical underwater infrastructure. Our Integrated Air and Missile Defence capabilities will be prioritised against the assessed threat as part of the future Integrated Force.”
Good news, however: this is only the beginning; the costs will not stop rising, as drone and missile countermeasures are developed in weeks, not years.
Good news is they have been developing drone counter measures for years already. We have the systems we just need to procure more but no way we are deploying missile sights at sights like Portsmouth or power stations in the uk.
EW systems or interceptions drones are the only viable solutions for such locations.
This is absolute and complete rubbish. “We have the systems we just need to procure more”
You don’t have the faintest idea of how fast anti-drone tech is moving and what works and what does not. We don’t have the systems and you do not have the faitest idea of what we do have, you idiot
The relatively low cost of drones when balanced against the cost of many potential targets suggest to me that we should not skimp on these defensive weapons.
A ew system like Leonidas cost about £20 million so this is quite a large investment by that standard. Our equivalent is ORCUS ( detection) combined with NINJA (jamming) RAPID SENTRY (hard kill) no information is available on how much a complete system cost but I would expect it to be in the £20 million range.
Agree, they should be widespread, that’s cheap in defence terms, a bit like what you often point out on the billions spaffed on things like Ajax.
Rubbish post, complete crap
Good news if true, if actually being actioned and if the level of urgency is understood by the second rate plastic politicians currently in Government. Big word salad by Pollard, containing the usual chuff bluff and bluster but no facts. They cannot help but politicking at every level, despite the emerging urgency of the situation. Aside from that, as I said, if actually new money, and not re-directed or deferred in the DIP then this is a rather basic but essential part of preparing for war, both external and of course internal.
Was just about to say, if.
Lots of long words and chuff but I judge details.
How many additional MDP are being recruited?
What additional sites will they protect?
How many additional MPGS are being recruited?
What additional RAF Police, RAF Regiment, and RAuxAF Regiment are being recruited?
Details!
“Integrated air and missile defence” It sounds wonderful until you consider the base level we start at, next to nothing.
One also needs to take into account the big cuts to MDP staff and withdrawal from so many locations over the last few decades. I track this stuff as you know, clueless MPs asking poorly worded questions in Parliament giving Ministers an easy get out by providing no tangible facts that can be proven by actions just words do not.
A lot will be technical, the likes of the MoD SSG, Security Services Group cover that at some of the most critical locations, but physical hardening, more people, more MWD, and proper CAUS defence is needed widely, not just more CCTV and words.
You have to take into account that many of these systems are automated and likely maintained by contractors.
We don’t necessarily need an uplift in manpower to accommodate them.
Not for them, Jim, in addition to them.
I believe the best scenario is a mix of both.
The Military Guard Service I understand operate the control rooms for cameras, as do certain MDP locations. As Fairford and Brize showed, you cannot just have technical, that won’t physically respond.
Give me a location with a MPGS det that covers 24 hour shifts, MDP in response vehicles on the perimeter with dogs, twin fences with a lit dead zone in-between with motion sensors and cameras then additional fences within around critical infrastructure and I’d like to see people infiltrate there. I know the SAS used to do it to test locations security, and I assume they still do, alongside a certain firm of contractors who have clearance and are ex military anyway.
Personnel cost money. It’s like the mix between conventional kit and excuses from HMG that Drones can do that to avoid the costs of doing it properly.
On the CAUS side, let’s see if any facts emerge on how many of whatever system and what in reality they can cover out of many dozens of key sites and arguably hundreds that might need more comprehensive protection.
I can guarantee you will never get any details on how many systems, where they are and what they are. That would all be prime knowledge for any would be attacker.
But it doesn’t mean they are not there.
The last paragraph I will respectfully disagree with mate. A handful, a dozen, who knows, might be procured and it’ll be a drop in the ocean to what is needed, opposed to what HMG portray.
Force Protection isn’t just about barbed wire and dogs. The security threat is constantly monitored at all levels. And overall, its worked well. It kept the IRA on its toes for decades. There is so much more to our defence then what is visible look at the fence line at a RAF base.
If you read my posts mate, I’m aware of that, I mentioned SSG for starters who are the opposite of barbed wire and Dogs.
I was calling for uplifts to both.
But you don’t know if we need uplifts. Like most people on this topic, its just guess work. And what is available is never going to be made public, that defeats the objective. All I’m trying to say is, there is a lot more protection then people realise. More can always be done. If things were really that terrible, the Americans would soon let’s us know. Considering how many military and intelligence gathering facilities they have in our country.
It was openly announced that the MoD police were withdrawn from several locations including vital DM sites.
Previous lists of MDP locations openly published online by the MoD themselves are wider than those currently listed by the MoD police. No guesswork, I put this to the MDP in one of my own FOIA requests and they obscured and obstructed in their reply as much as any Minister replying with vague answers.
No.guesswork, have a look yourself mate or look up the union response to the job losses from 2010 on, including key MDP OSUs that were once available.
I’d be surprised if they did provide you with detailed information though on such a sensitive topic.
Also, why are we relying ever increasingly on contractors for a key defence task?
In part because systems are becoming more automated and the skill level to maintain them is higher, uniformed personnel are ridiculous expensive.
If there is a range of civilians solutions for protecting things like nuclear power stations and airfields then it makes sense for us to use them and leave the uniformed personnel for deployment.
I can appreciate that, I think what I oppose is contractors guarding critical military sites where’s I believe they should be protected by in house military or civilians in the MoD, so MDP.
The wider UK CNI, sure, if HMG are not setting up any sort of home guard or volunteer force ( which I’d join if I was suitable ) then there’s no choice but to use contractors and all the extra costs that brings, like their profits. If we went to war, how many of these contractors would simply walk?
Complete bullshit
Spot on, too many locations, not enough understanding or interest from HMG! Let’s get the basics right first, fences, guards and CCTV then move on to the C-UAS and kinetic/none kinetic platforms. However as usual its word salad time, regurgitate the same oft repeated quotes from the DIP, to as you say not a real in depth question and no challenges to the answer. 👍
The last word in your comment is, I think, key: Internal. The main threat is already here and living amongst we Brits.
Name a politician who would care to state that plain fact to our faces.
Never in a million years, they’re responsible for setting the conditions for that to start with.
Oh, and Nigel Farage, been highlighting it for years, including in the Commons where he’s soundly laughed at by “politicians.”
I do always love statement of we have spent X million so it must be an improvement without actually providing any details of where that money has gone. Could have just all gone to research groups to advice on how best to defend the bases without any actual money in real improvements or could include existing expenditure on security and so not represent new money.
We haven’t got that much to protect – the legacy political parties have seen to that with their horrendous cuts and underfunding of the British military and Labour Party parasites are still cutting major military assets and massively underfunding the Royal Navy – Royal Air Force and British Army.
298 Billion over the next 4 years.
Robert that’s still not enough, just rubbing along with inflation when various factors are taken into consideration. When you look at the annual cost of the NHS for example, debt repayment, social security etc it’s not one of the priorities of HMG as their ideology puts other more politically expedient departments first. Cheers.
I suggest that’s true pre 2021 but since then defence has had the biggest uplift of any department across both conservative and labour governments.
We could triple the budget tomorrow and still have people saying defence is underfunded.
It’s very difficult to establish a budget when operating in a vacuum. There is no real clear threat that requires massive budget uplift. NATO remains a massively dominant force even without the USA. If ENATO fails to act against a Russian incursion then it’s a major issue for other countries and only indirectly for the UK.
The precarious financial situation of countries like the USA and France and the consequences for the UK and NATO is probably a bigger threat than a Russian conventional threat.
Less we forget the lessons of world war 2, it was not under spending on the military that caused the war rather a financial crisis and default by governments on bonds.
It’s a big uplift but coming from a very very low bar, anything is better than previous. But let’s not pretend it’s HMGs priority, as they are still paying lip service to an actual positive and effective increase, as the mostly unfunded DIP shows. I do however like the transformation idea regarding the use of drones at every level, from section level in the Army all the way to the RNs concept of the type 90 series of platforms. Even the concept of recruiting “geeks” who are role specific in AI etc, with minimum military training but emphasising their specialties in their respective field of geekiness!!! Cheers.
I think the government is well aware it needs to spend a lot more. To get to 3.5% is another 30+bn a year to find. And if they don’t want to borrow more, then every single government department is going to take a considerable hit to find that money. I’m not sure the general public is willing to accept cuts, or tax rises, especially with the current tax burden and the cost of living. People are very quick to label politicians as useless and weak. But we don’t have to make those kind of decisions. I’m glad I don’t.
Agreed, but we are having to come from a very low bar, in regard to increases above inflation which actually have a positive impact! We are however where we are, due to this and the previous bunch of clowns in HMG paying lip service to defence and investment, all the while quietly ignoring it. Cheers.
9+billion being spent on new/refurbished accomodation. 11billion on ammunition stocks. Serious cash. But it doesn’t affect the org charts. But its much needed. The government could spend an extra 30-40 billion, but doesn’t necessarily mean its going to result in 50 more Typhoons being ordered, or RN Escort fleet up to 30, or 25:000+ extra manning for the Army. Nuclear alone takes up a huge chunk of the budget. And through life costs. Its easy to say just buy another 5 T31s. But the real cost the Treasury is looking at is how much the operating costs will be over 30 years for those 5 extra Escorts. Bloody complex business.
How are getting on in protecting our Nuclear Power Stations, water treatment plants and reservoirs?
I’m not too worried about the Houses of Parliament!
It is good that there is now £700m on the table for home defence. But that is a pretty small sum to do the two jobs of security at defence and defence-related sites and the introduction of c-uav to cover military and critical national infrastructure (CNI) sites.
The MOD police (MDP) provide security at 21 key bases, including Barrow, Clyde, Portsmouth, Devonport, Raynesway etc, and the Civil Nuclear Constaularly cover several more, including 4 vital gas terminals. Nicholas Drummond thinks there are 98 key military and key civil sites that need security and C-UAV protection. The MOD Guard Service (MGS) handles elements of security at 135 sites. And there are undoubtedly as many again across the civil infracture and manufacturing tapestry. All this to say that providing anything like comprehensive security and C-UAV cover is a pretty enormous task that would require considerable investment on a far larger scale than £700m.
But at least we’ve made a good start. With Leonardo’s ORCUS, the US Ninja and Rapid Sentry, it looks like we have an advanced and capable detect-disrupt-destroy kill chain. The army’s Experimental Trials Group (ETG) at the Land Warfare Centre, Warminster, which is running Project Halo and testing Shield capability, says it is delivering good detection results, but the main obstacles are CAA rules regarding regarding use of effectors in civil airspace – and of course money.
Basically, we are just at the start of the C-UAV journey in kit and personnel. There is no point the MOD telling us the details at this stage, people would just start flapping and politicians would be tripping over themselves to score party-political points. The public and parliament were not told that we were labouring behind the scenes to build Chain Home prior to WW2. Have to hope that this is a similarly energetic surprise package.
The personel are so far coming from No 2 C-UAS Wing, RAF Regt. That consists of just 2 regular and 1 reserve squadrons, plus a reserve training sqn., which is not a big force to cover so many key sites. The latter suggests that the plan is to train up more RAUXAF reserves on C-UAS.
I could see us raising Home Service voluntary units at a lot of the key sites. No reason why we couldn’t form one at Babcock Rosyth, or at BAES sites, or Raynesbury, or dozens of other captive establishments.. The RAF air cadets have actually introduced drone training and qualifications, which should help the young lads and lassies into useful jobs in the future. The army reserve units could easily create the kind of Home Setvice units they had back in the 80s, where 5,000 older trained reservists formed units to defend key points. It would need an uplift in the number of trained RAF Regt C-UAV specialists to pull the whole thing together.
Main obstacle is that there is a very limited budget so far and ferocious competition for any extra money forthcoming.