It’s hard to imagine how the UK could be doing less to prepare for war

Published

1 year ago

April 3, 2024

admin

The government has no national plan for the defence of the UK or the mobilisation of its people and industry in a war despite renewed threats of conflict, Sky News has learnt.

Officials are now starting to develop a cross-government “national defence plan”, it can be revealed.

Dr Keith Dear, a former RAF intelligence officer and former adviser on national security, science and technology to the prime minister, argues below that it is reasonable for the public to assume there are detailed plans for any anticipated conflicts.

The US secretary of state warns we are “moving from a post-war to a pre-war world” and that “in five years’ time we could be looking at multiple theatres involving Russia, China, Iran and North Korea”.

The chief of the general staff, General Sir Patrick Sanders tell us that we are the “pre-war generation”.

The public might reasonably expect, therefore, that there are detailed plans, regularly refreshed, which would ensure we are prepared in advance for these anticipated conflicts, expected to be dramatically larger and more deadly than anything fought in recent memory – wars we might lose.

Surely, government departments, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office, the intelligence agencies and our armed forces have a plan to know what to do when it starts, are structured according to the requirements, and can respond quickly?

Such plans are essential not only to avoid scrambling disorder and early defeats but also so that our adversaries, awed by our preparedness, are deterred from fighting in the first place.

The problem is, there is no plan.

We used to have one. Maintained by the government until the early 2000s, the central Government War Book sensibly detailed plans for the continuity of government in the event of war and a possible nuclear exchange.

It was needed so those of us who survived didn’t awake to anarchy.

The book also contained essential plans for mobilising the country in response to the imminent threat and outbreak of conventional non-nuclear war.

To this central Government War Book, a whole series of subordinate war books were developed and maintained by all departments – most obviously the Ministry of Defence, Home Office and Foreign Office – but even the BBC had a War Book plan to sustain broadcast communications to an anxious public.

These were not abstract and vague, but planned against the specific, anticipatable wars we might face.

Today, there are no such plans.

The Government War Book was developed by the first modern pre-war generation – those living in the years preceding 1918 – under the leadership of ex-Royal Marine and first cabinet secretary Maurice Hankey.

The War Book was interdepartmental, and detailed what needed to be done, where, and by whom, both in preparing for war should we reach the “precautionary stage”, and upon its outbreak the “war stage”.

A copy of the Ministry of Defence’s 1963 War Book in the National Archives shows it to be detailed, and comprehensive, referencing multiple tightly coordinated, supporting plans across the government and beyond.

In 1935, the last pre-war generation also worried war might come in five years. Consequently, our government then began to refresh the War Book in earnest.

Concurrently in 1935, the UK began building its military, and military-industrial preparedness.

For example, Lord Weir, the Scottish industrialist, was appointed to oversee a plan he had earlier proposed: building “shadow factories” adjacent to automotive factories, ready to manufacture aircraft at scale when war broke out.

The government thought deeper too, considering the need to be able to manufacture the machine tools on which factories would themselves depend, and those that could automate elements of manufacturing to speed up the rearmament effort and free up people for other tasks in the war effort, investing public funds accordingly.

The preparation was such that, after some dithering, on 23 August 1939, the government began to implement the pre-war “precautionary stage” of the plan.

Within a week, by 31 August, almost all the precautionary stage measures had been actioned. The War stage was actioned with the declaration of war a day later.

Today’s pre-war generation has had two warnings: first from COVID, and then from Russia’s renewed invasion of Ukraine.

The government’s response to the pandemic, where there was no plan worthy of the name, and mostly chaos for months, allows us to imagine what it would be like if war were to come without a plan to mobilise for it and to fight it.

Similarly, our inability to supply anything like enough munitions or weapons to Ukraine, shows also how hollowed out we have become by buying and building armed forces to no coherent war-fighting plan. Weapons without ammunition are useless. And we can’t know if we have the right weapons, either.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

If the secretary of state’s warnings of war sound alarmist, consider this: the director of the CIA suggests China seeks to be ready for an invasion of Taiwan from 2027.

The chair of the US House Select Committee says that 2027 may be the end, not the beginning of the window for when an attack on Taiwan is most likely.

A leaked internal memo suggests at least one four-star general in the US Air Force expects a war with China in 2025. In Europe, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas believes that Russia may threaten NATO‘s borders within three years.

Sweden’s civil defence minister and commander-in-chief warns Sweden must prepare for war now.

Even in what was until recently a deeply pacifist Japan, over 86% of citizens polled believe their country may have to go to war, while their government has doubled its defence budget.

The government would say there is a plan. Whitehall lists resilience frameworks, alert systems, risk registers and regular meetings.

What these things have in common is none of them amount to anything Hankey, or any reasonable observer, would regard as a plan – explaining what we think could happen, and specifically who needs to do what, when, to respond effectively.

The long disaggregated, disconnected nature of the various government artefacts speak of their own weakness, with commitments to what we will have done by 2030 and beyond. Not a plan for how to respond if X or Y happened tomorrow.

If we are five years from war, it is worth contemplating Lord Weir’s question, posed to the last pre-war generation in 1935: “Are we doing all we ought to anticipate by proper planning and arrangement the grave delays which were the feature of our almost fatal unpreparedness in 1914?”

Today, there is no plan. It is hard to imagine how we could be doing less.

UK

Care whistleblower ‘who saw elderly resident being punched’ could face removal from Britain

Published

8 hours ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Care whistleblower 'who saw elderly resident being punched' could face removal from Britain

A care worker who reported the alleged abuse of an elderly care home resident, which triggered a criminal investigation, is facing destitution and potential removal from Britain after speaking up.

“Meera”, whose name we have changed to protect her identity, said she witnessed an elderly male resident being punched several times in the back by a carer at the home where she worked.

Sky News is unable to name the care home for legal reasons because of the ongoing police investigation.

“I was [a] whistleblower there,” said Meera, who came to the UK from India last year to work at the home.

“Instead of addressing things, they fired me… I told them everything and they made me feel like I am criminal. I am not criminal, I am saving lives,” she added.

Like thousands of foreign care workers, Meera’s employer sponsored her visa. Unless she can find another sponsor, she now faces the prospect of removal from the country.

“I am in trouble right now and no one is trying to help me,” she said.

Meera said she reported the alleged abuse to her bosses, but was called to a meeting with a manager and told to “change your statement, otherwise we will dismiss you”.

She refused. The following month, she was sacked.

The care home claimed she failed to perform to the required standard in the job.

She went to the police to report the alleged abuse and since then, a number of people from the care home have been arrested. They remain under investigation.

‘Migrants recruited because many are too afraid to speak out’

The home has capacity for over 60 residents. It is unclear if the care home residents or their relatives know about the police investigation or claim of physical abuse.

Since the arrests, the regulator, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), carried out an investigation at the home triggered by the concerns – but the home retained its ‘good’ rating.

Meera has had no reassurance from the authorities that she will be allowed to remain in Britain.

In order to stay, she’ll need to find another care home to sponsor her which she believes will be impossible without references from her previous employer.

She warned families: “I just want to know people in care homes like these… your person, your father, your parents, is not safe.”

She claimed some care homes have preferred to recruit migrants because many are too afraid to speak out.

“You hire local staff, they know the legal rights,” she said. “They can complain, they can work anywhere… they can raise [their] voice,” she said.

Sky News has reported widespread exploitation of care visas and migrant care workers.

Currently migrants make up around a third of the adult social care workforce, with the majority here on visas that are sponsored by their employers.

As part of measures announced in April in the government’s immigration white paper, the care visa route will be closed, meaning care homes will no longer be able to recruit abroad.

‘Whole system is based on power imbalance’

But the chief executive of the Work Rights Centre, a charity that helps migrants with employment issues, is warning that little will change for the tens of thousands of foreign care workers already here.

“The whole system is based on power imbalance and the government announcement doesn’t change that,” Dr Dora-Olivia Vicol told Sky News.

She linked the conditions for workers to poor care for residents.

“I think the power that employers have over migrant workers’ visas really makes a terrible contribution to the quality of care,” she said.

Imran agrees. He came to the UK from Bangladesh, sponsored by a care company unrelated to the one Meera worked for. He says he frequently had to work 14-hour shifts with no break because there weren’t enough staff. He too believes vulnerable people are being put at risk by the working conditions of their carers.

Migrant workers ‘threatened’ over visas

“For four clients, there is [a] minimum requirement for two or three staff. I was doing [it] alone,” he said, in broken English.

“When I try to speak, they just directly threaten me about my visa,” he said.

“I knew two or three of my colleagues, they are facing the same issue like me. But they’re still afraid to speak up because of the visa.”

A government spokesperson called what happened to Imran and Meera “shocking”.

“No one should go to work in fear of their employer, and all employees have a right to speak up if they witness poor practice and care.”

James Bullion, from the CQC, told Sky News it acts on intelligence passed to it to ensure people stay safe in care settings.

Additional research by Leah Adin

UK

Donald Trump may be denied privilege of addressing parliament on UK state visit

Published

8 hours ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Donald Trump may be denied privilege of addressing parliament on UK state visit

Donald Trump may be denied the honour of addressing parliament on his state visit to the UK later this year, with no formal request yet submitted for him to be given that privilege.

It comes after President Macron’s successful state visit this week, in which he was invited to speak in front of both Houses of Parliament.

Sky News has been told the Speaker of the House of Commons, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, hasn’t so far received a request to invite the US president to speak in parliament when he is expected to visit in September.

It was confirmed to MPs who have raised concerns about the US president being allowed to address both houses.

Kate Osborne, Labour MP for Jarrow and Gateshead East, wrote to the speaker in April asking him to stop Mr Trump from addressing parliament, and tabled an early-day motion outlining her concerns.

“I was happy to see Macron here but feel very differently about Trump,” she said.

“Trump has made some very uncomfortable and worrying comments around the UK government, democracy, the Middle East, particularly around equalities and, of course, Ukraine.

“So, I think there are many reasons why, when we’re looking at a state visit, we should be looking at why they’re being afforded that privilege. Because, of course, it is a privilege for somebody to come and address both of the houses.”

But the timing of the visit may mean that any diplomatic sensitivities, or perceptions of a snub, could be avoided.

Lord Ricketts, a former UK ambassador to France, pointed out that parliament isn’t sitting for much of September, and that could help resolve the issue.

In 2017, he wrote a public letter questioning the decision to give Donald Trump his first state visit, saying it put Queen Elizabeth II in a “very difficult position”.

Parliament rises from 16 September until 13 October due to party conferences.

The dates for the state visit haven’t yet been confirmed by Buckingham Palace or the government.

However, they have not denied that it will take place in September, after Mr Trump appeared to confirm they were planning to hold the state visit that month. The palace confirmed this week that the formal planning for his arrival had begun.

With the King likely to still be in Scotland in early September for events such as the Braemar Gathering, and the anniversary of his accession and the death of Queen Elizabeth on the 8th September, it may be expected that the visit would take place sometime from mid to the end of September, also taking into consideration the dates of the Labour Party conference starting on the 28th September and possibly the Lib Dem’s conference from the 20th-23rd.

When asked about parliamentary recess potentially solving the issue, Ms Osborne said: “It may be a way of dealing with it in a very diplomatic way… I don’t know how much control we have over Trump’s diary.

“But if we can manoeuvre it in a way that means that the House isn’t sitting, then that seems like a good solution, maybe not perfect, because I’d actually like him to know that he’s not welcome.”

A message from the speaker’s office, seen by Sky News, says: “Formal addresses to both Houses of Parliament are not automatically included in the itinerary of such a state visit.

“Whether a foreign head of state addresses parliament, during a state visit or otherwise, is part of the planning decisions.”

It’s understood that if the government agrees to a joint address to parliament, the Lord Chamberlain’s office writes to the two speakers, on behalf of the King, to ask them to host this.

It will be Mr Trump’s second state visit.

During his first, in 2019, he didn’t address parliament, despite the fact that his predecessor, Barack Obama, was asked to do so.

It was unclear if this was due to the fact John Bercow, the speaker at the time, made it clear he wasn’t welcome to do so.

However, it didn’t appear to dampen Mr Trump’s excitement about his time with the Royal Family.

Speaking earlier this year, he described his state visit as “a fest” adding “it’s an honour… I’m a friend of Charles, I have great respect for King Charles and the family, William; we have really just a great respect for the family. And I think they’re setting a date for September.”

It is expected that, like Mr Macron, the pageantry for his trip this time will revolve around Windsor, with refurbishment taking place at Buckingham Palace.

UK

Liverpool retires number 20 shirt at all levels in honour of Diogo Jota

Published

8 hours ago

July 12, 2025

admin

Liverpool retires number 20 shirt at all levels in honour of Diogo Jota

Liverpool have retired the number 20 shirt in honour of Diogo Jota – the first time it has made such a gesture.

The club said it was a “unique tribute to a uniquely wonderful person” and the decision was made in consultation with his wife and family.

The number 20 will be retired at all levels, including the men’s and women’s first teams and academy squads.

A statement said: “It was the number he wore with pride and distinction, leading us to countless victories in the process – and Diogo Jota will forever be Liverpool Football Club’s number 20.”

The club called it a “recognition of not only the immeasurable contribution our lad from Portugal made to the Reds’ on-pitch successes over the last five years, but also the profound personal impact he had on his teammates, colleagues and supporters and the everlasting connections he built with them”.