The Ministry of Defence is examining whether work at HM Naval Base Devonport can be accelerated following a nuclear regulatory review, as part of a wider £26 billion programme to upgrade the Royal Navy’s three main naval bases, Defence Minister Luke Pollard has said.
Responding to a written parliamentary question from Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty, Pollard said the Devonport Infrastructure Programme was continuing to modernise the base and reinforce its role as the Royal Navy’s centre for submarine deep maintenance.
Pollard said: “The Devonport Infrastructure Programme is making significant progress in modernising facilities at His Majesty’s Naval Base Devonport to reinforce its role as the Royal Navy’s centre for submarine deep maintenance. Upgrades to docking and waterfront infrastructure have already enabled Astute Class submarines to undertake maintenance activities in Devonport, with further improvements continuing across the site.”
He added: “The programme is also delivering additional support for current and future submarine classes, the recommencement of the submarine defueling programme, and new maintenance berthing capacity, strengthening the Royal Navy’s overall warfighting readiness.”
The MOD is now considering whether parts of the work can be brought forward. Pollard said: “We are currently reviewing opportunities to accelerate work following the nuclear regulatory review and we continue to press for the earliest possible delivery of the projects.”
The Devonport work forms part of Project Royal Oak, the £26 billion investment package covering HMNB Devonport, HMNB Portsmouth and HMNB Clyde over the next decade. In a separate series of parliamentary answers to Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge, Pollard said the programme covered infrastructure, estate renewal, accommodation, engineering, sustainment and operational support across the three bases.
Pollard said: “Project Royal Oak delivers key Strategic Defence Review recommendations by recapitalising the Defence estate and strengthening the Strategic Base. Through £26 billion of investment over the next decade, including major upgrades at Faslane, Portsmouth and Devonport, the programme will enhance warfighting readiness, support the Defence Nuclear Enterprise, enable the future Hybrid Navy, and improve the resilience of critical maritime infrastructure in support of NATO and UK national security.”
Asked how much of the £26 billion was allocated specifically to new capabilities and how much to accommodation, Pollard said: “The £26 billion investment of Project Royal Oak is an aggregate package inclusive of HMNB Clyde, HMNB Devonport and HMNB Portsmouth. This package encompasses a broad range of infrastructure, estate renewal, accommodation, engineering, sustainment and operational support activity.”
He added: “The disaggregation of these outputs includes aspects that are commercially and operationally sensitive, however financial data on MOD major projects is published in the Annual Report on the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) from the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA).”
Cartlidge also asked how much of the £26 billion represented new funding and how much had previously been announced. Pollard replied: “The £26 billion investment of Project Royal Oak represents the future investment package agreed through the Defence Investment Plan (DIP), which was a zero-based review of Defence budgets. This investment package encompasses a broad range of infrastructure, estate renewal, accommodation, engineering, sustainment, and operation support activity.”
At Devonport, the investment is intended to support both existing and future submarine classes, expand maintenance berthing and allow submarine defueling activity to resume. Completed docking and waterfront upgrades have already allowed Astute-class submarines to undertake maintenance at the base, with further work continuing across the site.
Project Royal Oak also includes plans for a Skills and Development Centre. Asked how many apprentices and adult learners the proposed facility would support each year, Pollard said: “The Skills and Development Centre scope is currently being refined. The number of apprentices and adult learners it will be capable of supporting will be confirmed once that work has concluded.”
The £26 billion programme was announced in July and is intended to recapitalise infrastructure at the Royal Navy’s principal bases while supporting the nuclear enterprise, future fleet requirements and the wider readiness of the Service.
Simple fact is we need to increase/update capacity in all areas. As far as nuclear goes I think we also need to try and find a way to reduce dependence on US systems – perhaps in cooperation with Germany? The US is simply too reliable and proving to be more of a liability than an ally/asset.
I agree Rob, I think there is real scope for a UK and German program as party of the Trinity house agreement to develop an MRBM capable of providing conventional or nuclear strike capability for the UK and a potential trident replacement/supplement with the ability to triple pack MRBM into the Trident Tubes offering the ability to vary the missiles carried on the Dreadnaught class.
While Germany does not yet want nuclear weapons it clearly wants systems that can make it a threshold nuclear power.
Dreadnought will only carry 12 tubes..
Not sure how you intent combined ops with that fact…!
After 30+ years of European unreliability, you are saying we should trust them now because they are (selfishly) taking the Russian threat more seriously than the US, as it on their doorstep? We have been at odds with virtually all major European powers at some point over various things e.g. Iraq, Afghan, Northern Ireland, Gibraltar, Falklands, Brexit, Cyprus, Diego Garcia/Chagos, Israel, Ukraine, Libya, Syria, Eurofighter sales, defence contract bribery, decades of defence underspending relative to the 2% NATO target- they aren’t altruistic friends, they are selfish actors. Yes, the US is too, but less so in my opinion, and a much better partner to have on your side in times of crisis. Culturally we are somewhere between the US and Europe, and can leverage that by being the bridge between the two. The US may seem to be at odds with Europe at the moment, but that’s because most of Europe has central left leadership right now whilst the US has a right wing leadership. But Europe is heading to the right at quick speed. The gulf isn’t truly as big as it appears right now, due to the timing of election cycles.
You think the US is less, oh that’s funny. That being said we clashed with European countries mostly because of daddy America (not all, but mostly)
So being you’re not ‘centre left’ and perhaps right of centre I assume… you would argue for what? Doing whatever Daddy Donnie asks/demands for?
The Uk is European by geography there is no escaping that, currently given the global players (and likely for some time) our interests will be far more aligned with Europe, unless we want to continue to be sons of America
I mean if you was making an argument that truly speaks to being an Independent bridge between both I’d perk up and listen actually, that’s not what I got from what you wrote though – you seem to be hoping the uk goes even further right.
As far as I can tell, if you are looking to them as examples lool MAGA, the every day working people, apparently don’t seem to be enjoying ‘winning’ so much and militarily lool well we know what’s going on don’t we.. I’m not sure what the sell is there.
Anyway, I’m up for practical independent steps personally as far as our military is concerned given that the geo politics now and it’s long term implications
Cheerio!
It was Europe’s and our fault to rely on the US Military Umbrella to the massive Extent that we have since the fall of the Soviet Union 35yrs ago.. were now learning a few harsh lessons about lack of Military Power…! Notably…Little say in World Affairs..! And bluntly its what we deserve..!
Ah yes, it was so non-selfish of europe to underspend of defence so that it could fund loads of welfare programs whilst keeping nice and snug under the American security blanket. The UK thankfully stayed above the 2% threshold, although as we all know still cut much further than we should have. Now we (the west, europe in particular) are all collectively paying the price, and many are blaming uncle Sam (as usual), who has been rightfully critical of those who were underspending for years and now expect America to pay for Europe’s weakness (lack of deterence against Russia, and lack of materiel support available to support Ukraine through donations and defence industrial assistance).
The UK is going right too, like it or not. The alternative is national destruction through open borders, in which case our military becomes redundant. Without a shift to the right, here or elsewhere in Europe, there will be scant money available for defence. I have no doubt that our interests will align with Europe, but will also align with the US. Geography is not the be all and end all, otherwise you could say that about Russia, or Belarus, or Morocco etc; even though that is blatantly untrue.
The fact is that the entire western world is in demographic decline, and there are a lot of up and coming powers who blame us for all their problems and would like to exact revenge if they could. And they are slowly becoming more capable of doing so. So Europe and the US need to stick together, even if we have slightly diverging interests on many things. We tend of magnify these differences precisely because they are our allies. In reality, on a global scale, we are closely aligned and that is exactly how the rest of the world sees us. Stop the western infighting to save the western world – that would be my advice to world leaders.
Nice article header image of the Brazilian Navy!
is it always that empty. is it ever at least 1/2 full. it just looks so empty ?
or on a lighter note to confuse the bear?
thanks.
Understandable emphasis re submarine infrastructure upgrades. Question:. Anyone minding the store re replacement frigate maintenance facility? Presumably must be available by 2035 @ the latest.
Awesome amount of money being Spent on just a couple of current Dry Docks…???
Meanwhile little news on Project EUSTON which will supply us with three Floating Dry Docks at fraction of the Price…!
We need to look at returning fleet support back to HM Dockyards (MOD Navy). The amount of time wasted shuffling paper and costings hence loads of administration jobs are the only to the gain of Babcock etc. No wonder we cannot get fleet readiness in time and vessels are in a queue awaiting work.
A properly staffed insurance policy that we had until the late 1980’s prior to privatisation worked well with the right skills to mobilise like the Falklands effort.