The Government is aiming to bring forward proposals for new defence readiness legislation later in this Parliament, but has not set a specific date for introducing the measures.
Defence Minister Luke Pollard provided the update in response to a written parliamentary question from Conservative MP Stuart Anderson, who asked when the Defence Readiness Bill would be presented to Parliament. Pollard said the Government is examining what additional legal powers may be required to prepare the country for a major crisis or conflict, following a recommendation in the Strategic Defence Review.
He said: “Defence Readiness legislation is being considered to ensure the Government has the powers it needs to keep the UK safe in crisis or war, as recommended in the Strategic Defence Review.”
The legislation has yet to reach the stage where ministers can provide a firm timetable. Instead, the MOD says detailed policy work is continuing to determine precisely what powers are required and what their wider implications would be.
Pollard said: “We are aiming to deliver legislative proposals later this Parliament. It will take time to develop the detailed policy requirements, understand their implications and establish what new legislation is required.”
That wording leaves both the detailed contents and timing of the proposed legislation under development. It also indicates that the Government has not yet concluded exactly which elements of its defence readiness plans will require new primary legislation.
Any eventual legislation will also have to compete for Parliamentary time.
Pollard added: “As is standard with the legislative process, any future legislation will be brought forward when Parliamentary time allows.”
The proposed measures stem from the Strategic Defence Review’s focus on improving the ability of the state, Armed Forces, industry and wider society to respond to a serious security crisis or war. The precise powers to be included have not yet been published. The MOD says officials are working across government on potential measures, with further engagement expected once that work is sufficiently developed.
Meanwhile Rome still burns🙄
The term Nero springs to mind. Long grass, inaction, inept. Also fit the bill.
the grapevine suggests. defence readiness legislation. will be ready by at least .or near about 2035 and 2045.
but then again the grapevine has known to be slightly off?
just a thought….
A lot of in tray being stuffed under the carpet…
There is a whiff of cordite…apologies…an election on the air.
Let’s hope so otherwise it might be somebody else’s cordite on the air soon enough, and Blair’s Britain doesn’t have much with which to respond…
Please note.,anyone who believes this shower are interested in defence.
A national missile defence system – any chance of such a thing?
No chance of that, the economics just don’t make sense. Even China and the US haven’t achieved that, at least outside of Trumps dreams. Even Israel can’t achieve 100% coverage despite being a much smaller country. It only takes a single warhead getting through to flatten London, at which point the whole effort would be wasted.
So we just give up and potentially have all of our cities hit?
Of course not, that’s why we have Trident. When it comes to nukes, the best defence is a good offence.
So a scenario. A Russian submarine is positioned west of Ireland and fires a number of conventional armed missiles into targets.
Sure lots of casualties potentially but not sufficient to cause government and social collapse. Yet you response/only response is a full nuclear strike
That is intermediate and intercontinental ballistic missile defences.. which are insanely expensive.
But cruise missile and shorter range ballistic missile defences are not.
No
If I was preparing for imminent world war I definitely wouldn’t want to start from here!
Have we been steadily raising army numbers & equipment? No.
Have we been steadily raising air force warplanes & missile stocks? No.
Have we been planning to start building warships for the RN beyond the bare minimum peacetime fleet numbers?(IMO 25+ escorts) No.
Have we been stocking up on air defences & building air raid shelters? No.
Have we been fawning after & cosying up to the latest insane Fascist in the WH who is a Russian asset? Yes.
Its all hot air, absolute bloody tripe.
The Government says ‘ We have increased defence spending to its highest level since the Cold war’
Its really terribly simple, at 2.4% ( including our nuclear deterrent) we have broadly speaking, the ability to continue with the current defence posture of ‘ managed decline ‘.
The extra money is simply paying down the financial black hole in the defence budget.
So, if we want to increase something, then an existing capability elsewhere has to be reduced or (because everything is now at a minimum) cut completely.
Thats where we are, the government will do nothing about the vast welfare budget, or the crippling interest payments on their overspending.
Welfare is running at 11% of GDP and growing, I would suggest we reduce that to 9% and reallocate that money to defence.
There are no other options.
Agreed! However that welfare budget keeps the back benchers in line, otherwise they will vote against our none elected PM if he even tries to shave off a few pence!
Spot on!
” Detailed policy works continues” of course it does, this shower have no clue, no interest or votes in defence, henceforth its kicked into the long grass again and again, In fact, with the slight whiff of a desperate election in the offing, there will be ZERO money going to defence other than the garbage that was stated in the DIP, as buying votes and therefore keeping your backbenchers happy is very expensive. They are terrified of the Greens (as we all should be but for different reasons) will hoover up the mad ideological lefty votes and of course the new arrival family votes!
Yes you would have to be dippy to think DIP was a serious attempt to improve defence .Putin probably had a grin from ear to ear when Burnham said welfare before defence