National service would only be a hindrance to our already depleted Armed Forces

Rather than enhancing our defence capability, Rishi Sunak’s plan to conscript untrained youngsters would only reduce it further, says Admiral Lord West

Rishi Sunak on a visit to RAF Lossiemouth in Moray (PA Wire)

The proposals for establishing some form of conscription – articulated in a rush by the Conservative Party, in what seems electoral opportunism – can look superficially attractive. Having youngsters engaged in key areas such as defence of the nation is so much better than them being immersed in identity politics.

The devil, though, is in the detail – and rather than enhancing our defence capability, it would further reduce it.

When national service was last introduced, in 1949, there was a vast network of training areas that had been in use during the Second World War. Back then, the Royal Navy had the strength of about 153,000 recruits, the Army 370,000 and the RAF 193,000. All were used to running a training pipeline for conscripts.

Today, we have armed forces that total only 138,000 – too few to meet our commitments. For decades, but particularly over the last 14 years, we have been selling off camps and training areas concentrating in as few bases as possible.

Using any of these limited assets, be it people or facilities, will impact on current activities. Rishi Sunak’s new national service plan would therefore deplete our defence capability.

I joined the Royal Navy not long after the end of National Service. It had, by the time of its abolition in 1960, become an expensive drag on the ability of the Armed Forces to prepare for the new threats of the Cold War. And none of the officers I served under in my teenage years regretted its loss.

For a number of years, defence analysts and others have been concerned about the steady reduction in defence spending that had accelerated during the coalition government. The need to increase defence spending seemed to be ignored by the prime minister when he was chancellor, and has only been acted on with the approach of a general election. This ill-thought out conscription scheme will increase pressure on defence and waste money.

Over the last 14 years, our military has shrunk by a third, and satisfaction with service life, pay and morale have plunged across the board. In the words of Ben Wallace, the last but one Conservative defence secretary, our Armed Forces have been "hollowed out".

And now, instead of a serious and comprehensive plan to strengthen our defence capabilities, the prime minister says he will plug the gap with 30,000 untrained teenagers doing their year of compulsory work experience. That tells me he does not understand the level of danger that our country is facing – or the level of support that our Armed Forces need to respond to it.

The cost of providing that training, let alone the facilities, accommodation, uniforms, equipment and other supplies that go with it will cost significantly more than the £2.5 billion so far allocated to this scheme, and will leave no money spare to train the 600,000 teenagers forced to work as NHS support staff, lifeguards, or ambulance crew members instead.

The government says that a Royal Commission will look into these matters – but anyone with the most basic experience of how much it costs, and what it entails, to turn a new recruit into someone that can usefully serve in our Armed Forces would not need a Royal Commission to tell them that the proposal as currently presented is utter nonsense. Was no one with that kind of basic experience consulted about this proposal before it was announced?

In the normal course of events, we could put this down to the pressures of the election campaign – a hare-brained idea dreamed up by spin doctors desperate for a headline – and be confident that, whoever is in charge after 4 July, this idea will be buried where it belongs.

As the war historian Max Hastings has said: “The Tories’ latest proposal for national service emphasises their incurable frivolity, rather than any serious commitment to the nation’s protection.”

As an idea, it may belong in the frenzy of an impending election, but it is not a serious plan for the future of our Armed Forces, at a time when the state of the world demands one.

Labour peer Admiral Lord West of Spithead GCB DSC P is a former First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff