In 1999, I published a tongue-in-cheek briefing for Geoff Hoon on becoming Defence Secretary. I was amused to see that someone in the MOD accessed the article on the day of the recent Cabinet reshuffle. Always trying to be helpful, I have updated it for Des Browne as he takes over. Not much needed to be changed. The original article can still be seen at: www.sourceuk.net/article/0/556
Welcome to the Ministry of Defence, Secretary of State, which I am sure you will find more comfortable than the Treasury. I expect you are a little surprised by the wonderful modern working conditions –indeed each office chair cost £1000. Your policies of private finance have certainly brought us great benefits at head office – if rather fewer operationally.
You will remember how well received within the armed forces, and more widely in the country and internationally, was the new Labour Strategic Defence Review back in 1998. Happily, few noticed that it was predicated on an Atlantic foreign policy rather than a European one. In any case, the need to adjust our priorities after 9/11 means that no one remembers our original promises. Smart procurement has been an area of particular interest to all your predecessors, and I am sure we will manage to make it work eventually. Some of our financial assumptions are however proving a trifle optimistic, which is unfortunate given the other pressures on the defence programme. We shall of course look to you for greater success in the coming battles with your old department.
You will find this a fascinating organisation to run. It inevitably generates a number of personnel issues which appeal to the popular press. They can always find human interest stories to titillate their readers. At any given time, you can expect to have field questions on bullying, on sexual harassment and on racism. We are assumed to be the centre of all conspiracies whether it is UFOs, aircraft accidents, Gulf War syndrome, nuclear tests or early work at Porton Down. We will provide you with an easy reference guide to cover the most lurid. We are in the fortunate position of controlling most of the information to the Press as we prohibit members of the Forces from contact with journalists. There are some troublemakers among retired senior officers, but they can usually be relied to argue amongst themselves.
Now let me turn to operational matters. Of course the operation in Iraq, and our new deployment to Afghanistan, has given us much valuable experience, and we do our best to keep Parliament ignorant of any lack of progress. In any case, we can usually use operational security considerations to obfuscate replies to difficult questions. Fortunately, most of our records are stored in a building with an asbestos problem, which takes care of the Freedom of Information requests. We are ever hopeful that the new government in Iraq will at some stage reverse the decline into chaos, and give us some relief; but for the moment we must plan on maintaining troops there for some years – unless the Americans decide to go home first. Afghanistan is our new exciting challenge. The chaps are really looking forward to bringing relief to that beleaguered country. In return, we hope that you will bring some clarity to what you would like them to do.
Manpower numbers are of course a great worry. Unfortunately, we have had more people leaving than we can recruit, which meant that we have needed "to rebalance" the forces. This, by the way, is the phrase you should use when talking about infantry cuts. These reductions do make it more difficult to manage the deployments so that the troops get an occasional break back at home. We are trying to make more use of the TA, but this has given rise to some other difficulties. Unfortunately employers are becoming less enthusiastic about losing their workers to the army for long and frequent detachments.
Equipment issues are always towards the top of the in-tray. Given all the action we have seen, the Chiefs will be pressing for early replacements of upgraded weapons in greater numbers. Most of their favourite things are produced in the USA, which of course does not help in our quest for greater European co-operation. This is also a problem as the US Congress no longer trusts us with their industrial secrets, and certainly does not want to give any manufacturing business to UK. We shall give you a separate briefing on how we are going to spin the news if the new carriers have to go to sea without any aircraft.
Finally Secretary of State, we all wish you a happy time at the MOD, until your friend Gordon Brown takes over and promotes you to somewhere more important.