John Healey, Labour MP for Wentworth and Dearne and Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, recently challenged the Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, on the pressing issue of the United Kingdom’s maritime security.
During a parliamentary session, John Healey questioned the status of the UK’s naval fleet, underscoring the importance of having Royal Navy ships at sea to safeguard Britain.
According to last year’s data presented by Healey, eight active warships did not leave the dock at all. Furthermore, the newly commissioned Prince of Wales carrier spent only 267 days at sea, while it remained in dock for repairs for a staggering 411 days.
“Why is he still failing to get more of our ships at sea more of the time to keep Britain safe?” Healey asked, thereby bringing the Navy’s operational efficiency into question.
In response, Defence Secretary Wallace defended the Navy’s current status, explaining that it was not unusual for a third of the fleet to be alongside for maintenance, deep maintenance, and preparation for sail and training. He claimed that his aim had been to increase the total days at sea for the Navy, and according to him, this goal had indeed been achieved.
Responding to Healey’s argument about the number of ships at sea simultaneously, Wallace pointed out that he had initiated the propulsion improvement process to get the Type 45s—constructed under the previous Labour Government—back out to sea. He announced that three such ships had been successfully overhauled, with one at Cammell Laird in Merseyside, one at Portsmouth, and another at Cammell Laird.
On the topic of the problematic aircraft carrier, the Defence Secretary claimed that the responsibility for the ship’s design and construction lay with the Labour Party, and he was now tasked with rectifying the issues.
Get the number of ships up while in build now! An extra T26 and a couple more T31 all before T32, T83. Re-commision one T-boat to get sub availability up.
“eight active warships did not leave the dock at all”
It doesn’t look like a shortage of ships. Crew and or budget seems to be the issue.
You’d think that these should be the easiest things to fix. All the bright sparks in charge need to find a way to get this sorted!
It’s the hardest part to get solved. Every SDSR there are cuts and the navy looks at its options and is stuck with various long term contracts for new kit that it can’t get out of and everyone doesn’t like there to be hull cuts and so first up is a cut to supplies and ammo as that can be cut without anyone noticing, next up is to delay repairs as much as possible to keep at sea costs down again easy to hide and finally recruitment which saves training costs and then there is a cut to anyone else… Read more »
They need to get rolling with T26 and T31 and if they perform well in trials order a new batch of them provided they can produce a production line and chuck them in the water to a solid drumbeat. With Russia and China at the moment even if we don’t need them allies will. I don’t think moving backwards with subs is a good move. Just order a new batch of Astutes.
A shame this subject has to be a points-scoring duel played out by politicians.
Healey perhaps shows his ignorance at the reasons that naval availability cannot ever approach 100%, but disingenuous for Wallace to imply that Labour were in charge for the whole of the carrier construction period – anyway political parties do not design or construct ships, so WTF!
Agreed. Thank the gods that politicians do not design warships..!
Cheers Michael
Agree with the Comment on points scoring, but someone has to own the responsibility for letting the fleet run down and the current slow procurement/rate of new builds.
Both parties expertly failed to build warships ships for decades.
Old knackered ships require a lot of maintenance.
Older ships need larger crews.
Doris did at least get T31 underway and gave impetus to FSSS as well as really getting T26BII over the line (OK Rishi announced it but it was a done deal).
T32 was also pushed forwards. Although without Doris championing it the funding flexbility to get it moving might struggle…
Why does someone have to own the responsibility? Isn’t it more important that the fact of a run down is accepted, that we need to reverse it is accepted and that the budget to do so is made available?
Polictics. A policticans job is to blame everyone else and try and avoid actually doing anything themselves or giving any concrete promises on fixing things, as they can get blamed for it, if it goes wrong.
I think it is clear who to blame for decisions on fleet size reductions – PM, Chancellor and DS.
(Lack of) Timeliness in ordering is down to those three too.
Slow delivery is down to Industry unless the User has re-set the Requirement or DS has ‘pushed the project to the right’ to ‘smooth’ the spend profile over time.
Having said that, if the navy ends up with more than the 19 escorts it has had in recent years, then maybe we can forgive and forget. The RAF and the Army would love to increase their manpower/platform count.
Spot on, both Parties have to take responsibility but fact remains this Govt has been in power for over a decade and you could have built ships in that time. That said Wallace himself isn’t the one responsible for the present situation and as he says the T-45 is what it is and he seems to have got that sorted as best he can, and even the mid life updates to T-23 have not been under his control they were entering that process too late in all honesty and again at least he has got new (again too delayed) ship… Read more »
Exactly.
T23 LIFEX should have been racked 5 years earlier once T26 timeline was clear.
How has Wallace done anything on the t45, the whole repair / engine fit was agreed before he become defense sec. His done a lot of good and probably the main reason Ukraine are still in the fight with the early nlaw deliveries, but his blaming others for any issues and taking credit for everything else. Ok it’s polictics but really wish we had honesty in it.
Mate, not all total gloom and doom. Tories came to power 11/5/2010. Since that date – Two carriers launched and commissioned. Sixth T45 launched (11/10/2010). All T45s commissioned. HMS Dauntless through PIP; 2 other ships undergoing PIP. Type 23 – 12 ships underwent Mid Life Upgrade. Type 31 – 5 ships ordered 15/11/2019. HMS Venturer laid down 26/4/2022. Ist steel cut on HMS Active 24/1/2023. Type 32 – 8 ships ordered (B1 2//7/2017; B2 15/11/2022). HMS Glasgow launched 25/11/2022. Astute lass SSN – Subs 2-5 launched. Subs 1-5 commissioned; Subs 6-7 laid down. SSBN – Dreadnought class approved. 1st steel… Read more »
Yes, but political decisions were made in the case of T45 and QEC that impacted on the design.
Ah, yes. Very true. I particularly remember the cats&traps vs STOVL debate that was run several times – caused huge delay and added cost.
Availability should gradually improve as the final T23’s finish LIFEX and the T45’s go through PIP.
Additionally the problems with Prince of Wales were unfortunate but not part of a recurring pattern and the decommissioning of Monmouth/Montrose freed up manpower to ensure the remaining fleet can be crewed.
Operational Capability and Notice for Sea.
Someone needs to explain that to Mr Healey… Again.
Using Healeys argument… Why is the RAF not flying permanent CAP over the UK being refuelled by Voyager tankers… ? Why are the Army not sat in their AFVs dressed in CBRN kit just in case someone invades Hastings and uses Nerve Agents …
Wallace has more patience than me… I would have called the Shadow DS thick as mince and instructed him to swivel.
I think the major issue is this:
Operational Capability is the driver not being a ship at sea. You can be at sea but still not have a lot of OC. You can be alongside in a 4 week maintenance period or even a dry dock ( depending on the work being done) and have shed loads of OC For example not having a Flight Deck trained team limits your ability to to embark and operate a Helo to conduct SAR work. Having a broken RO plant limits endurance to a few days before needing to come alongside to rewater. Being in an emergency dry dock situation… Read more »
Well said
There are a load of reasons why we could do with more ships at sea, for starters the war on Ukraine and also the mess with Iran, and the list goes on and on. It doesn’t define what a warship is and so can’t tell what’s included in the 8, but does seem a large number for ships to not leave dock at all in a full year.
Ah, Bravo.
Personally, I think that’s rather insulting to “mince” 😏
Healey trying to point score off what is universally recognised as the best defence secretary in decades… clearly he’s not a great strategist.
Quite.
I fear for what someone as stupid as Healey could do.
Particularly as BW announced that Treasury were 100% behind getting what ships we had available hence PiP + T45 Sea Ceptor……
I think there has been bending of budget rules with the 2 x T23 retired to fund other things faster. I hope those other things are contractually locked in.
Fingers crossed Ben is adding cancellation clauses with severe financial penalties to as many defence contracts as possible at the moment, just in case Labour get in at the election.
As mastered by G Brown Esq formerly of No 10 Downing Street!
Cancellation clauses are typically pretty expensive in commercial stuff. You’d have to pay out what had been spent plus the full gross profits on a repudiatory breach claim.
That is why cancelling most contracts is so expensive.
Exactly 😉
It’s equally possible that the next conservative government could cancel them all, as sunak doesn’t seem to value defense and he also doesn’t seem to have a long shelf life. So yeah let’s hope lots of heavily cancellation clause to stop whoever pulling the plug.
“Sunak doesn’t seem value defense” Really? Given the amount of military assistance we’ve given to Ukraine under his watch I think Sunak realises the importance of having a good military. If the Tories lose the next election, he’s probably out. But otherwise he has a long shelf life ahead of him: • During his time, Labour’s lead has been cut from 30% to 12% • He’s more popular with the general public than the Tory party • If they dumped Sunak, they would probably have to consult the membership – the same membership that elected that economic fruit-cake Liz Truss.… Read more »
Giving stuff to Ukraine doesn’t mean he values defense, it means he understands the PR and saw Boris take advantage of it. I still think Wallace made most of the decisions though. It took a while before Boris started taking credit for the initial deliveries, which is not like him, if he did anything he made a big song and dance over it. I think he only got interested when the news stories hit of the nlaw having an impact and then immediately he had himself with a union jack and holding a nlaw. Sunaks has issues, there was 2… Read more »
Since Feb ‘22 I think every democratic politician in the West now values defence. Wallace will approve final suggestions of what to give as suggested by the Defence Council. But I’m sure the final decision will still need rubber-stamping by the First Lord of the Treasury; ie Sunak. From memory Boris was front and centre from the start of us supplying NLAWs to Ukraine ahead of the invasion. Sunak has issues only because • The membership didn’t get to have a vote, because the MPs realised that they would probably choose someone as deranged as Truss. The MPs know that… Read more »
Oh really, so where is the extra funding for defence? Taking things seriously would be reversing the various cuts such as the cut to the frigate number that recently happened or the hercs, etc. For UK policticans Ukraine isn’t about defence it’s about a PR photo opportunity. Boris was classic for it, everytime there was a bad story, he would appear in Ukraine.
Taking something seriously means taking actions and not just talking about it.
“where’s the extra funding for defence?”
Guess you’ve not been paying attention to the news
https://www.ft.com/content/b2fe3bab-4f86-434e-ba50-63727c292389
Sea Ceptor to be added to T45, adding Aster NT for BMD to T45, Naval Strike Missile (NSM) purchase, the purchase of Schiebel S-100 Camcopters, etc are all recent unexpected capability increases.
As for why the number of frigates was cut, there’s a good reason, they were clapped out
https://www.navylookout.com/why-has-the-royal-navy-decommissioned-6-ships-in-a-year/
And I repeat where is the extra funding? Buying new kit by cutting other areas, just means the MOD is being creative to fill gaps, rather than funding being made available to avoid having to cut capability.
Err… giving you’re still asking about extra finding it’s pretty obvious you didn’t bother reading the link to the Financial Times that was in my previous post.
Why ask questions if you ignore the answers? 🤷🏻♂️
Hmm, this is the same Wallace that is advocating getting rid of the Hercs despite two thirds of the A400 fleet being grounded and unavailable due to a number of issues including chronic spares shortages……
Well he did ask for more money and would have received it if Boris had still been PM.
Rishi however is another bean counter.
No, this is the Ben Wallace who is following the RAF’s advice in getting rid of the Hercules.
Link as to the grounded number of A400s?
His hands are tied. Sunaks hasn’t provided the extra cash that both Boris and Truss promised (who knows if they would have actually delivered as neither is known for delivering on their promises).
I see you’re still ignoring the extra £11 billion 🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
No as that’s not extra cash, that was a short term (spread over 5 years) to compensate for the inflation and knock on the pound that truss caused, it didn’t increase the buying power.
Of course it’s extra cash, it wasn’t originally in the budget.
To quote the FT :
“the extra money would increase British defence spending to 2.25 per cent of gross domestic product this year and next, from about 2 per cent now”
That’s just spin. It was announced by the government thst the increase was to fill the blackhole caused by cost increases, hence why it’s only for a limited period and not an annual increase. Most of the money is going to the Dreadnaught project.
So you’re accusing a journalist of spinning for the government? That’d be a rarity these days, most seem to have it in for them.
Guess you’d didn’t read the rest of the article where Hunt says he hopes to move it up to 2.5% permanently.
I have read the article, I also have heard hunts statement in full. The newspapers just repeat what the government says most of the time without adding analysis. Hopes is not an increase. A bit like all the extra hospitals that the conservative hoped to build etc etc. As always follow the money, not the spin.
“The newspapers just repeat what the government says most of the time without adding analysis” Really? I find media tend to contain more opinion/analysis that actual reporting these days. Hope is an intent, better to state the intent rather that state definitively and then have to roll back on it due to circumstances beyond your control. A lesson Starmer will learn if he gets elected and then inevitably fails in his growth pledge. And yet again you misrepresent the situation. Yes I have followed the money, it’s £3.7bn to spread amongst all 40 projects. All have received money, some are… Read more »
Correct
Wallace has hardly put a foot wrong, was smart to duck the leadership contest and has been excellent as defence secretary
Don’t agree with the army being reduced to it’s present size on his watch but it’s always about ££££ which we lack and agree with the increased spend on the RN
Apparently he’s a possible for next NATO Secretary General, though the French are grumbling about a Brit possibly getting it.
Hi Sean
Not bitching and what I am about to say you probably know
The French have a problem with us and the USA (the Anglo Saxons 🙃OMG)
They want to be top dogs
Bit dodgy during the Balkans war and now the proposed EU equivalent to NATO which could undermine the latter
They have always ambivalent to NATO ducked out of the command structure by De Gaulle over nuclear policy in 1969 and did not rejoin it for 40 years
i had better stop before I really get going
(I have a French cousin and worked for a french west african trading company along time ago)
I think the French grumble is that Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe (DSACEUR) is currently a Brit, so having a Brit as the NATO Secretary General is a bit greedy.
The French have a bit of thing about Anglo-Saxons, you’d have thought it was us that kept invading them, not the Germans! 🤷🏻♂️
(Full disclosure, I did date a Frenchwoman years ago – was a bit of a nightmare, though great cuisine 😆)
The problem I have is that Labour ARE as thick as mince on defence; which really irks because even in opposition they’re paid top dollar but they’re not up to the job.
Build quality isn’t something you could hold Labour accountable for, the T45 power programme is.
However, the Cons are responsible for delaying the T26 programme that if delivered earlier, as planned would probably have seen a massive order from the US.
Swings and roundabouts but both parties are dire on defence.
Nicely put.
Just record it on a loop…digital obvs….
John Healey is a snivelling little worm. The fact that this man may potentially be the Secretary of State for Defence in the next 2 years is frightening. As my local MP for the majority of my adult life, and after meeting him on a number of occasions, I can testify to his complete lack of any real knowledge about anything what so ever. Parachuted in to probably the single safest labour seat in existence back in 1997, he’d like to kid you he’s a local lad with one of his parents form Wakefield I think? But in reality he’s… Read more »
Don’t hold back, say what you really feel 😂
Just had an absolutely honking morning at work then read this… Came from the heart that one! 😂
I’m with Rob, you really have to get off the fence and say what you really think!!
The Sunday before last I travelled by ferry from Portsmouth to Ouistreham for a tour of the Normandy Battlefields. On that afternoon while one T45 destroyer was providing the guardship for the Coronation 5 more of the 7 we have were in HMNB Portsmouth, 2 in dry dock. The upshot of that is that only one was potentially at sea. I am not suggesting that none of the three tied up alongside was available for operations but one at sea does not seem right. I would add that there was only 1 type 23 in harbour though she was covered… Read more »
• We only have 6 T45 not 7
• The 3 tied up were available for operations. Better there than being at sea in the wrong location, or having to return to port for munitions/fuel/etc before then undertaking a tasking.
So 4 out of 6 were available, that’s pretty good.
https://www.navylookout.com/snapshot-the-royal-navy-escort-fleet-in-march-2023/
IT’S not just number of ship’s what’s the problem it’s having the manpower this days in all three services.🙄
Cant say manpower…Its crew!😉
“personpower?” 😉😆
Well after constantly f**king with pensions and wages it’s not surprising.
No arguments there.
I stayed on 75. I may have been better off eventually under the newer schemes but it was a quality of life decision. My break even point against the newer schemes was at aged 78…at that point I will stink of cabbage and not be in a position to enjoy my pension as I do now so I said no, I will stay with what I have. Wages now are better. The changes to Engineering pay spines has corrected the injustice of Pay 2000 Vs the Blanket Stacking White Mafia. It now recognises Engineers for what they know and do… Read more »
I’m not so sure about being out to sea as a metric..yes you need visibility, training and to be doing the job..but at the end of it the Navy also has to be ready to deploy quickly to an area of conflict and if your running your ships and crews to the ragged end, when it kicks off you will have nothing on short notice to deploy… The US looked at this with their carriers and actually reduced the amount of time their carriers are at sea to increase surge availability. Currently, the US Navy uses a 32-month cycle. Given… Read more »
Great point that’s easily overlooked, why have ships at sea just for the sake of having them at sea? If they aren’t undertaking training or on a specific tasking, better to have them in port and prepped so as to be available for deployment when needed.
RAND have always been excellent in operational research, I recall coming across them in my Computer Science degree 30 years ago.
You have a degree? Fcuk, you could have fooled me judging by posting a comment like that. There is no better training for our sailors than being aboard an RN ship at sea
I imagine quite easy to fool you given some of the ridiculous comments you come out with.
You apparently don’t realise there’s a different between at-sea training and sitting around on a ship sailing around in circles just for the sake of it. I assume you regard journeys on the Isle of Wight ferry as naval experience?
If theres one thing that pisses me off its a silly little troll spoiling really interesting discussions from people that know what they are talking about. You don’t.
Talking about yourself again, what a narcissist!!
You do need the assets in the first place to even then be able to explore options. More assets more options but as you say more waste and inefficiencies possible too.
Agreed this is more about how you use your ships in the most effective way. It in no way let’s you reduce your number of ships….or is a replacement for having to few for the expected tasking… so the USN did not use this as a way to reduce the number of operational carriers just optimise the effectiveness and maintain their 6+1 strategy from their total of 11 carriers..that’s 6 carriers either operational or available at 1 months notice and 1 carrier at 3 months notice…with 4 in bits. It does mean that the US now has a lot less… Read more »
A very comprehensive reply, Jonathan, thank you. I learned a lot from that. Makes good sense not to wear our your fleet by just sailing around. However, it occurred to me, although ships are in port at various states of readiness, what about crews, what are they doing (apart from shore training)? Are there the numbers of people standing by and available to crew ships at relatively short notice?
Very coherently expressed.
Shame Healey doesn’t do simple logic.
Yes a lot of our politicians are lacking or seem to lack that ability…it seems the use of crappy sound bites outweighs the need for serous thought in our political classes.
It looks like a lack of knowledge and he should be briefed better. But few politicians or members of the public understand that the number of ships or aircraft on paper is not the number operational in the front line. In the RAF, 50% of the fast jet aircraft are in front line squadrons, the other half are in squadron reserve, war reserve, attrition reserve, OEU, OCU etc. The latter 50% are there to keep the first 50% operational. Ditto RN escorts and subs, it used to be that out of a squadron of 7, 4 would be at sea… Read more »
Also there’s the small element of ships wearing out being constantly in high tempo operations, like the RAF with their jets, they don’t last as long as European counterparts in time scale as they fly more hours.. tornado for example.
Navy Lookout May 10th – Sad indictment of the lack of management capability of both the MoD and the Admirals, don’t think you can blame the politicians in this instance. “HMS Vanguard finally sails from Devonport after refit lasting more than 7 years HMS Vanguard, one of the four Trident submarines that maintain the UK’s nuclear deterrent, left Devonport yesterday after a very much delayed Long Overhaul Period and Refuel (LOP(R)). When Vanguard arrived in December 2015 for her second (LOP(R)) it was expected to take a maximum of 4 years and cost £200 million. Her three younger… Read more »
Labour plays politics with every issue regardless of how important it is and Ben has batted it back in the same manner. It’s a big turn off. It would be far more constructive if Labour were to put solid proposals on the table and indicate that they would work with the Government to achieve that or something similar. Swing voters are looking for sensible strategies not punch and judy politics & starmer wonders why he is not as popular with centre ground voters as he would wish😂
Good luck with that one Mark, both mobs are bloody clueless and equally useless, I have zero confidence in any of them.
At least Ben Wallace actually cares about his job and tries to fight for defence….
The likely result of the next bun fight is an even more bloody useless Labour/ Lib Dem coalition ….
God help us all, that will be the sh*t show to end all sh*t shows…..
Agree with you john think Ben Wallace trys is best but on defence all party’s seem to have difficulty getting it right .🙄
Despite being asked for political reasons questioning the availability of the fleet is perfectly reasonable. Why keep investing in new ships when we can’t seem to keep the existing ones at sea. The Royal Navy should have prioritised availability years ago. Trying to blame Labour for the Type 45s design is idiotic. As I always tell my children mistakes happen it’s how you deal with them that’s important. It has always been a Tory government in power when it became necessary correct the T45s misfortunes.
1 3rd to be docked that is acceptable when you have sufficient numbers to operate but in todays climate of indecision and war brings back memory’s of the second world war where consecutive governments stuck there head in the sand and left this our country UK illequiped defence wise shame on the government and to be honest shame on the population of the UK for letting them do it
Underscoring?