New Government Command Paper sets out “full scale of the UK’s national nuclear endeavour”.
The Defence Nuclear Command Paper has been published following the Prime Minister declaring a ‘national endeavour’ to secure the future of the UK’s defence nuclear industry and backed by more than £200 million of Government funding.
The Prime Minister’s announcement also included investments in nuclear skills, which will help create more than 5,000 new apprenticeships in the next four years as part of a new nuclear skills plan, and quadruple PhDs in the nuclear sector.
“It is backed by a total of at least £763 million investment through a partnership between the Government and industry, including BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, EDF and Babcock. The benefit of this investment will be felt from the Naval Base on the Clyde to the nuclear laboratories of AWE in Aldermaston.
It will also drive private investment and create thousands of job opportunities to help keep the nation safe, from specialist scientists and engineers to welders and electricians, to project managers and Royal Navy submariners. The publication of the Command Paper sets out the full spectrum of major programmes and relationships with industry and international partners and comes as the Defence Secretary says that maintaining the UK’s nuclear deterrent is as important now as it has ever been, in an increasingly contested and volatile world.”
Defence Secretary Grant Shapps said:
“The threats facing the UK and our allies are increasing in scale, complexity and diversity, which is why our nuclear deterrent is as important now as it has ever been.
This Government has always been unequivocal in its support to the UK’s nuclear deterrence, which is foundational to our national security, but also brings huge employment and skills opportunities being realised right now across the country.”
Seems like we keep putting more resources in to nuclear submarines but the output keeps getting reduced. The USA seems to have similar issues. Fortunately China and Russia seem to have much the same problems.
China is getting its production ramped up. It’s got its escorts coming out fast, carriers in build and lots of other ship types coming into the PLAN.
Less said about Russia the better. It’s ships are dropping fast.
Your right on surface ships but China has a severe issue building SSN’s at the moment same as us. Only one yard that can build them and it’s full building SSBN’s.
Let’s hope they don’t have another yard in one of those tunnel bases
Since the war there has been a general trend in defence inflation whereby each generation of platforms costs roughly double the previous generation, in real terms (i.e. relative to general CPI). This is partly due to relatively small production runs but also a consequence of the fact that ‘bleeding edge’ technology is pricey because it’s immature by definition.
This should not be to the detriment of conventional forces. And it is.
That is what HMG will not answer with the sheer costs involved in maintaining this.
Before anyone asks, I fully support the UK being a nuclear power.
So true, to be a nuclear power and have a conventional deterrent as well we’re looking at going back to 3 to 4 percent of GDP, and before any says that’s unaffordable, it was affordable in the 90s, not that long ago. If we went to that budget we’d actually get more bang for our buck as well as the lead times on equipment won’t be artificially slowed to fit budgets and equipment would then be cheaper.
Agreed we did it back in the day . And now the world been what it is our government seem to want more sleep ⏰ 🙄
Because we spent less on things like the NHS and education. Now if the general public can accept that, then its fine.
Just need to cull anyone over 79 and job done.
😆😬
Or cull anyone who refuses to work . Not those that have paid into the system their whole lives.
The difference is Robert and looking at this from the opposite direction, you could pour the entire defence budget into the poorly organised money pit of the NHS and I will guarantee no one would notice the slightest difference or improvement…
50bn is a lot of cash. But I get what you mean. Many improvements could be made to the NHS, but the politics usually gets in the way of major reform. My wife has worked for the NHS for 20 years. It is a wonderful service that we take for granted. But it needs to be run like a private business. Not funded like a private business, but run with the same efficiency as a large private business. Easier said than done though.
If we dialed the number of retirees back to the 90’s levels then no problem. There is a reason why every industrialised country has been fiscally incontinent since the mid 2000’s
That’s the reason I pulled my pension pots early Jim, I will guarantee Labour will pull the plug on over 55 pension access, because they need our generation of late 50’s to keep paying the bills.
If we ever have an administration that actually gets people to work, instead of sitting on benefits, because it ‘pays better’, we ‘might’ make a start in getting out of the mess….
Unfortunately Labour will likely just double down on the easier option, i.e, folks who are already paying into the pot…..
In the 90’s we were not spending £4bn a year on debt interest and since then the demographics of our country have changed massively, as has the state of our economy. It’s worth looking into the UK finance comparison as it makes for harrowing reading.
Completely agree, predict that w/ the significant costs of a complete renewal of UK nuclear capability, a crisis will ultimately develop in funding conventional capabilities. That will be the decision point to either abandon one of the capabilities, or substantially increase the defence budget. No odds available re decision. 🤔👍
It’s easily affordable.
If anything, spending 3-4% of GDP on defence, and spending much of the procurement budget on British equipment, would help boost both local and national economies.
More orders requires additional staff, meaning more skilled jobs created, and those skilled-workers spending their money.
Also makes export sales much more likely when we’re buying in larger numbers which drives up efficiencies of scale and drives down the per-unit price.
So am I , and I know we agree on the isues caused when the Nuclear deterent was included in the MoD Budget to the detriment of conventional forces. It is a sovereign/strategic capability and one we should continue with – but at some point it either comes back out of conventional budget (my particular choice) , we get an increased budget to accomodate it (somehow I doubt it) , or we seriously consider the impact it has on our conventional forces and how far they are to be reduced before we decide to no longer have the nuclear capability-… Read more »
But there is only so much money coming in. A stagnant economy, an aging population, a lack of migrants workers to fill the gaps, further impacting our low productivity economy. As a man who I respect greatly, where does the money come from to pay for everything whilst our health and education services are in a serious state of dilapidation? Increase taxes? We are already at a point of some of the highest contributions since the end of the second world war and our national debt is at a record high, our public service pension liability is over £3tn on… Read more »
Is there really a lack of migrant workers?
Go look at our population pyramid and birth and death rates and become informed with irrefutable data my friend.
Irrespective of our birth and death rates, which I am sure paint a picture of a declining indigenous and ageing population…Here are some very recent HMG stats:
February 29, 2024
The UK granted a total of 1.4 million visas last year (the highest ever recorded). This includes:
Not mentioned are those migrant workers who were already here.
There were 4.0 to 5.6m EU residents in the UK in June 2023 (sources vary).
Yes
Actually, yes.
In terms of legal migrants, there has been a significant reduction.
Illegal immigrants don’t count as they can’t legally work and therefore aren’t benefitting the economy.
From The Home Office blog: “The UK has experienced unprecedented levels of immigration since the pandemic. The latest official estimates show that net migration in the year to June 2023 was 672,000 – up significantly on pre-pandemic volumes but lower than the 745,000 who came in the year to December 2022. This is partly because of our generosity towards people fleeing conflict and persecution in Ukraine, Hong Kong, and Afghanistan; over 80,000 people have immigrated to the UK on as our Ukraine, BN(O) and resettlement schemes in the last year. But it is also because of rising numbers of… Read more »
It’s still nowhere near enough. We have a massive of people of working ages who are economically inactive. Reluctant to fill low paid positions and generally low on output. Go check the ONS website for productivity and also check some global productivity studies from the management consultancies
Should Government not deal with the indigenous population who are NEETs, rather than rely on ever increasing numbers of migrants. Otherwise, the benefits bill gets ever larger and the increased population strains the country’s infrastructure, including but not limited to housing.
I am well aware of the UK’s poor productivity record. Are you suggesting this is solely or mainly due to not having enough migrants to fill vacancies? There are many other reasons for low productivity.
Of course I am not suggesting that and obviously there are lots of reasons. I don’t have time to write war a peace, some of us have work to do.
I think COVID has had a far bigger impact on our finances than Brexit. People are still living longer, Brexit or no Brexit.
That might well be true, but the true impact of Brexit will be felt for decades to come. We have lost a huge amount of influence on the world stage, we are just one of many middle powers now and we can’t even get trade deals with India and the USA. Bad government and letting people decide on topics they don’t truly understand have totally and utterly farked up our key position as a gateway to Europe for the US and a centre of monetsry finance for the world. It’s easy for all the arm chair generals in here, of… Read more »
I’m not sure I agree with the loss of influence around the world. Brand Great Britain is still incredibly strong around the globe. Our influence spreads greater than our current financial status. Our language, for example. Our permanent seat on the UN Security Council. We are a world leader in soft power, and our diplomatic service is still arenowned across the world. Even the far reach of the BBC. We have always been a global player even when our finances haven’t always matched. And I don’t see that changing. I think we have a ticking pension time bomb,and as we… Read more »
Our language is only spread around the globe thanks to the Americans. Every single foreigner learns American English and not our beautiful original flavour. Granted on the veto but what power does the UN have? The answer is none.
I think I’ll have to disagree with some of that. But it’s late, and I’ll have to bid you goodnight. Work in the morning. 👍
“Thanks to the Americans “..OK if you say so. Thank god it wasn’t Colonialism …that what I expected you to say I assume that will be used next to denigrate.
I am English. Just not blinded by ridiculous nationalism and a belief that we are anything other than a bit part nation in a long term terminal decline because of a succession of bad choices, bad investments and bad government.
Thats just not true, very far from it, with the exception of Canada and some parts of the Americas, people learn English, try listening to Indian news presenters, they speak a standard of english the the BBC USED to speak. Being in the European Union bought is nothing, as the trade figures are actually showing.
You keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
You claim a lot of data analysis credentials and yet you peddle the immigration Ponzi scheme with no shame at all. Curious.
That makes you sound like one of the anti immigration biggots. It’s simple math mate. We don’t have enough people of working age to support the volume of boomers pensions and healthcare without significant rises in taxation. Go do the math before running your mouth
Not your mate arse on fire. I am not just anti ongoing immigration, we need mass deportations thanks to the Tory scum letting everyone from Africa and Asia in.
No you are not my mate. You are a brain dead biggot and I shall not waste my time proving points to idiots.
* it’s bigot Ahmed.
You can’t prove your point because the millions of extra people you want here also get older, need more healthcare, then want pensions. You are left with two options, say no and deport you lot or the option you want, tens of millions more of your kin are brought in. And so on. Hence, it’s a Ponzi scheme.
Every time I see “Grant Shapps said” I do not know whether to laugh or throw up. Politicians are nothing but liars and snake oil salesmen. Surely people realised that after TB Liar, Brown, Cameron and the rest?
A pack of fools , all went round with there eyes close while Russia had bad intent .By the time Cameron got to power it was officious Russia were starting to be more Aggressive and yet he made huge cuts 😞
Because we are technically bankrupt but agree it was foolish to wait for the group nation state panic buy like everyone is doing now.
I feel this pain. We have career politicians that make decisions over 5 years to keep their jobs rather than do what is right for the country. We spend more of our income on pensioners than any other group as they vote more prolifically
It would have probably been better to not have had the two expensive aircraft carriers built but went for a smaller version size of the old Ark Royal still would have been able to fly F35s off them. Could have saved a couple of billions. We not big enough or powerful enough now to be classed as a global power anymore I would have preferred having two Vanguard’s at sea at any one time more surface ship protecting the waters around the UK and Europe.
We could also stop giving millions to countries around the world to wash our conscience of empire.
Or just take all that money we send in the foreign aid budget and give it all to Ukraine.
I really should have a standard text ready for when somebody suggests that reducing the size of the carriers a bit would have saved huge amounts of money. There have been lots of studies on the relationship of carrier size, cost and capability. They have all come to the same conclusion that the percentage cost savings are much less than the size reduction whilst the reduction in capability is much greater. It makes sense if you think about it: whatever the size, you still need much the same cost in engines, generators, motors, radar, command and control – all the… Read more »
Compared to the US Navys Ford class carriers. The QEs are the bargain of the century.
Studies undertaken for our future carrier project some years ago showed that smaller carriers would not generate the required sortie rate.
Neither will the ammount of planes we will have that can use them.
According to most in here two isn’t enough.
I see vast amounts of money going in to nuc subs but not many built, not worth the cost, lots of talk, warm words but bugger all to show we have 5 modern attack subs with 2 finishing up and 4 clapped out Missile subs, may wise to buy a few non nuc patrol ones off the self. The military loves hight tech bespoke things but as always the delay getting them in to service and long trials times pushes cost. May time start buying off more kit the self for every thing. As was done with Archer, in service… Read more »
The 7 Astute class are the most capable and deadly nuclear powered hunter killers ever built. They are the most technically complex machines man kind has ever built. That is why they cost so much. And is why so few nations can build subs of this standard.
not denying that that is why we only get 7, its not 7 replacing 7 is it? its reduction in numbers to fit the cost and manning problems, its great have top kit but little means its does go far, a pay off?
And no more than 4 or 5 will ever be at sea at the same time if even that many
When we had 15 SSN’s Soviets had 235 nuclear boats.
Now we have 7 and the Russians navy has 15 with only four built this century.
Comparably we are much better off than we were. The RN is now vastly superior to the Russian navy and could take it on solo. We could not have dreamt of doing that in the 1980’s.
Russia has 15 SSN’s and SSGN’s total in theory but it’s doubtful if most can put to sea. Its SSK are severely limited in their ability to operate in the Atlantic in peace time. In war time they would die very quickly in open ocean.
Agreed, yes NATO is very good at ASW, the Russians are not. Few more escorts and ASW aircraft and the UK would be set, but not doing to badly as it is.
China only has 6 and all are inferior and they can’t build any new SSN for a long time as they desperately need to build SSBN’s.
Apparently China has a supposed power navy 😀
again that 6 attack subs both nuclear and diesel?
6 nuclear, China has a bunch of SSK subs none that can get to within a few thousand miles of the Atlantic much less the UK.
Chinas navy is over rated, you would never see it in war in the Atlantic or Med, again i agree totally with you
And that is why we want/have the very best. Two Astute boats could cause major headaches for any Navy. And would keep most in port. Because most Navy’s fear what one of these boats can do with our superb perisher trained captains in command. Not just respect, but fear what they could do.
Agree, one or two SSN’s can dominate an ocean and only a few navies all western allies have the capability to deal with them in open ocean.
Thankfully HMG got the message and we are doubling the fleet.
There is every possibility that we will be down to three boats anyway for five years, maybe more from 2025 onwards so the question is, could we run CASD with three Dreadnoughts? I know what contemporary wisdom is and I’m not skilled enough to say one way or the other. One on patrol, one working up, one in maintenace? Do we have to have five year refits? Also, maybe we should consider a two tier approach. Cruise and/or free fall weapons. Food for thought?
We are down to three boats because ones in maintenance, not much has changed other than the length of the period. This should be significantly less than Vanguard as the reactors not being refuelled and many lessons have been learned. If we really have to we can run CASD with two boats. The biggest limit is the crews not the boats. One at sea on in dock is doable atleast for a few patrols and a couple of years. The USN was doing much the same in the Cold War.
I was speculating as to whether we could build three rather than four with allthe attendant costs? More money for conventional forces?
Fingers crossed. Future Vanguard class refits should be shorter. Covid had a massive impact on the refit schedule with all the social distancing/restrictions ect.
As you say, fingers crossed but have a look at my reply to Jim. Thoughts?
4 boats really is the minimum requirement for enduring 365 operations. You could manage with 3 for a period. But you would require longer patrols (as we are seeing today), which will ultimately affect the PVR rate. And if an unexpected engineering issue affects one of the operational boats, you will seriously struggle to cover the task.
Fair enough. A passing thought. Maybe someting for technology in the future.
Ideally you would want 5 rather than 4,3 just leaves no room for unforseen issues.
Can’t afford five, not sure we can afford four but just a passing thought really. 🙂
Maintaining a nuke deterent with insufficient conventional forces is criminal. Nukes are a final guarantee, conventional is the basic warfighting/deterring tools. Putin showed the criminal he is by both invading his peaceful neighbour he was supposed to guarantee their sovereingty & threatening to use nukes against nations opposing him.
I think already submarines are getting obsolete OK they can carry Nukes but I think with all these Drones knocking out Tanks I’m sure Nuclear submarines can be found easily or missiles shot down before reaching its target come on folk let’s not waste more money in big fireworks I’m sure we have weapons now that nobody knows about.
Really?……
Water is very hard to see through so submarines and tanks are somewhat different.
Russia poses no serious conventional threat to us only a nuclear one. Talking about the UK nuclear weapons as a deterrent is actually as misnomer. Trident II is primarily designed to provide a counter force strike against Russian land based ICBM’s.
It’s literally the last thing we should think of getting rid of in the face of Putin’s aggression. It’s the only thing stopping Putin from going nuclear.
I do wonder about a barrage of conventional missiles against UK targets. Lacking missile defence we’d be very vulnerable & key defence facilities, especially seeing how they’ve been consolidated so much for economy, could be crippled. Key civil facilities too.
The realm of Brittania should use DK 1000 tecknowlogy to defeat WW2?NKVD dirty bombs and natzie SDKFZ situations producing kiloton antidotes to nefarious third world capabilities that were associated with Stalins NKVD WMDs..A Kiloton of Atropine or HighLeval antibiotics would be better than a KT of D5 anticholingerics for Dopamine.Detoxifiers and D9 Inhibitors to promote all our lives instead of ending them.St Paul’s intercession during “the blitz” was a good example of Devine intervention in order to save Londoners from perishing.Megatons of multivitamins for famines and antibiotics for plages.What direction should you go?It’s all relevant to our existence and coexistence… Read more »