Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

MPs accuse Prime Minister over failings in national security strategy

 

Andrew Grice
Wednesday 30 April 2014 00:12 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

David Cameron has been accused of putting Britain’s national security at risk by not ensuring the Government has proper contingency plans for national emergencies.

An all-party group of MPs and peers criticised the Prime Minister for telling them when they quizzed him in January that he believed in “planning on the basis of what you want to achieve.” They warned that the crisis in Ukraine and last winter’s floods in Britain showed the need for better long-term and strategic thinking in government.

In a report published today, the Joint Committee on National Security Strategy expressed concern that the absence of contingency plans is “dangerous and unwise.” It added: “An attitude if ‘no plan B’ is dangerous when national security is at stake.”

The MPs and peers said the new national security strategy due to be published after next year’s general election should consider energy security, climate change and acknowledge that the UK would have less clout on the global stage. Denying a loss of influence would be “wishful thinking rather than credible strategy,” they said.

Margaret Beckett, the Labour former Foreign Secretary who chairs the committee, said: “The Prime Minister has been helpful and candid with us about his approach to national security and vision for the UK’s future, but we think he is too focused on managing current events at the expense of looking ahead. Recent events at home and abroad are a salutary reminder of the value of thinking about threats to our national security in the widest sense and of keeping a close eye on what is over the horizon.”

Mrs Beckett added: “Worryingly, there is every sign that we are heading for another rushed job after the election and for a ‘motherhood and apple pie’ document that again avoids the big questions and is of little practical use in guiding government decision-making. That is not what this country needs at a time when resources are limited and we must focus on what is most important.”

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in