Murphy: 'Defence will be front and centre during the Scottish referendum'

09 October 2012

Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy tells DMJ editor Anthony Hall about how the United Kingdom is stronger together and how Labour intends to outthink the coalition on defence

In September 2011, the Labour party's shadow defence team, led by Jim Murphy, published an Independent Defence Procurement Report, followed in February by the launch of consultations for its defence review: a three-tiered process covering policy from current and future security threats to international alliances and the impact of the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR).

The national debate on defence is becoming increasingly divisive, as the reaction to the Defence Secretary's statement on unit cuts and Force 2020 showed – a mood unlikely to improve once discussions on the future of DE&S and role of private contractors really gets going later this year.

Asked for his opinion on the impact of coalition politics on national defence, Murphy gives a considered response. The public's idea of the coalition was that it was doing what was in the national interest, Murphy begins. "These parties that don't agree on much have come together, and the public saw it as a strength in the beginning. I think it's being seen increasingly as a weakness." And in defence there is strong evidence of coalition rivalry when decisions need to be made, he continues. "This can delay the process, and it's got nothing to do with defence but everything to do with politics."

An example of that is within the issue of the replacement of the Vanguard class submarines. The government has announced a delay in the final decision until 2016, although it signed initial contracts for the work in May in the face of Liberal Democrat policy against a like-for-like replacement of the deterrent.

"I think there should always be a big debate," says Murphy. "If you spend that amount of money on anything there should be. The big debate is the deterrent and how much of an impact there will be. That should be a hot topic for discussion, it is part of democracy. If you are going to renew your nuclear deterrent on a Tuesday afternoon and no-one notices it – or discusses it – that is not our country."

In framing the debate, Murphy is asked how prepared the Shadow Defence team is to carry out the next review.

"We've started our work on it already, for our defence review in our manifesto," he says, with sessions being held with academics, industrialists and defence experts. A conversation is being held, and questions asked. "What is Britain's role in the world? What are our alliances? What is our relationship with European countries? Why do we configure our forces in the way we do? Do we need a sovereign capability?"

It is necessary to ask these questions now, says Murphy, as is the very act of undertaking a review. "I've been asked how long I think the government is going to last. No-one knows, but you've got to assume to 2015. We are going through a process now where people may disagree with the outcome, but they cannot question the process because it will be exceptionally thorough."

Indeed, a lack of thoroughness is Murphy's only criticism of the current SDSR. "They did a lot of strategic thinking to fit in with the spending programme," he says. "They made a mistake, but they had the right to be wrong. They did it to link the SDSR with the Comprehensive Spending Review." It would have been possible to do the SDSR over a longer time, he says, "but they chose not to".

In his view, the SDSR failed to offer a clear vision of the country's place in global events. "It didn't say: 'Here is Britain's role in the world.' They could have provided the public with alternatives and different solutions but they didn't." Without wishing to "in any way dishonour what we believe our unique influence to be," the Shadow Defence Secretary says that he wants the Labour review to express alternative views. "What I mean is that I want to take that process – a sense of generating your thinking with people outside the system – into government."

"I've never been a minister in the MoD. I've been a minister in five other departments and each has its own issues. The MoD these days has become synonymous with complexity," he says. "It is brilliant in supporting operations, but not when it comes to grasping issues that have been around for generations".

"I know things have to change, particularly in procurement. When the election is called we want a procurement model ready to roll and to implement. We also want to be more ambitious, and have a better plan than the present government."

As regards the likelihood of a greater role for contractors, "I'm not dogmatic about the use of the private sector," Murphy says. "I would like to see more private sector expertise on the MoD side for procurement." There must be an obligation to deliver, he adds. "I want to know how the private sector guarantees our people, in whichever theatre they find themselves in, that they get what they need when they want it." He calls this obligation "an unconditional duty to serve", and as yet he says "we haven't got that".

A clear procurement policy would certainly help the Shadow Defence team improve its standing. Labour is still dogged by the tales of procurements past. There is also the charge of the £38bn deficit run up in the defence budget, a fact that has been disputed since it was first mentioned in 2010, which was questioned when Philip Hammond declared it eliminated in May, and that now Murphy insists to us lacked substance all along.

"Well, the £38bn figure isn't true," he says. "It is a Conservative Party fiction, and a great political tactic, but you can't substantiate it." The reason why the charge has hung around for so long he says has more to do with politics and public perception than hard facts. "If your rebuttal isn't as quick and as sharp as the assertion, then it won't work."

The government's current response to the defence implications of Scottish independence seems less thought through than that put-down, he says.

"I am a Scot, and this concerns the two countries I care about most. I am not sanguine about it economically. I am not sanguine about it in terms of the UK's role in the world. I think the four countries of the United Kingdom are the most successful coalition of nations on Earth."

As far as formulating defence policy, Murphy declares that he is one of those who think we need a UK to defend first. "I look at the map of the UK, and if we lost Scotland we would be less of a global influence," he says. The future of the UK's defence is not only about the home of the deterrent, "it is about RAF bases and the ability to patrol the Northern coast, it's about securing oil platforms, shipbuilding on the River Clyde and recruitment into the British Army". These are enormous issues, he says, and emphasises that as the referendum draws closer, the issue of defence will be debated "again and again and again".

And the SNP? "I don't even think the SNP have acceptable clichés, and they certainly don't have answers," says Murphy.

"There is a lot in this. Defence will be front and centre come the referendum, because there is a huge affection across the generations for our armed forces, and Scotland isn't going to turn its back on that."