AN “indefinite delay” in the building of Type 26 frigates for the Royal Navy – as suggested at Westminster yesterday – would be an “absolute disgrace” and a “betrayal” of shipyard workers on the Clyde, according to the SNP’s defence spokesman.
Brendan O’Hara’s remarks came after an ill-tempered meeting of Westminster’s Defence Committee, which heard that work on the vessels had not started because their design was only 60 per cent complete. Defence Minister Harriett Baldwin denied that suppliers involved in the £8 billion programme had been told to “mothball” their contributions for up to three years.
O’Hara said Baldwin could give no assurances on the future of the work. It was promised to the Clyde yards by David Cameron before the independence referendum, on condition that Scotland voted No – but the Tories have consistently failed to honour that part of The Vow and have cut the number of ships from 13 to eight.
O’Hara said: “This latest blow to the Type 26 programme is an absolute disgrace. When I asked about the scale and range of cuts to the defence budget because of Brexit and the huge cost of Trident – I got no answer.
“Today Harriet Baldwin has given us part of the answer. Her comments about the Type 26 programme will have been no comfort to the workers on the Clyde who now look like they are facing an indefinite delay.
“This would be an utter betrayal to those workers – their families and the communities that depend on the work. The enormous cost of Trident appears to be spiralling out of control, and it would be completely unacceptable and unforgivable if the Clyde yards had to pay the price for the Tory obsession with Trident – a weapon of mass destruction that 58 out of Scotland’s 59 MPs opposed this week – and an economic black hole caused by Brexit.”
The MoD denied a cash shortage was behind the delays. Lord West, the former first sea lord told the committee last month that work on the new ships had been put back from 2016 because “there’s almost no money available this year, and we are really strapped next year”.
However, MoD chief executive for equipment Tony Douglas told the committee yesterday that no start date had yet been set because the warships’ design was only 60 per cent complete.
Committee chairman Julian Lewis warned that delays in getting the state-of-the-art vessels into service could end up costing money, as the operating life of the Type 23 craft they are replacing may have to be extended.
Industry insiders and experts had told the committee there was a shortfall of around £750 million in the sums needed to press ahead with construction, Lewis said, adding: “We believe that if the money was there, this programme could start very soon.”
But Douglas said cash was not the issue, as the MoD was still negotiating with BAE Systems over the final design of the ships’ communications and computer networks.
Around £1.8 billion had already been committed to long lead-time elements of the project, he said.
“If you were building an extension on the back of your house, you wouldn’t get it priced if it was only 60 per cent designed,” he added.
Douglas declined to say when the Government would be in a position to name a start date for construction, but said it should come in “the relative short term”.
The issue was also raised on social media, in a curt exchange between First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson.
Sturgeon tweeted: “Hi – while we have your attention ... do you have anything to say about this?”
Davidson responded: “Remind me again of the number of warships you planned to build in an independent Scotland? Zero, right?”
There was no further reply after Surgeon said: “The question was about the promise you made in 2014. How about explaining why it’s being broken rather than deflecting?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here