Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
200-219)
GENERAL SIR
DAVID RICHARDS
KCB CBE DSO ADC GEN AND
BRIGADIER JAMES
EVERARD OBE
27 JANUARY 2009
Q199 Chairman:— particularly
in the light of what you said in your opening answer about the
need to revisit the whole picture?
General Sir David Richards: Yes,
absolutely. I think it is a key area for all of us generically.
Q200 Linda Gilroy: You gave us a
fairly clear idea of the resources and commitment to planning
for provision in civil emergencies, but I wonder if you can just
give the Committee a further idea of the sort of scale of that
commitment. I assume that it involves the resilience exercises
and what does that, in a typical month or year, look like?
General Sir David Richards: To
make sure he earns his keep this morning, James organises all
these things.
Brigadier Everard: We do run a
comprehensive training programme, exercise programme, throughout
the year and, in anticipation that that would be one of the questions
that was asked, I have brought a list of those resilience exercises
which have taken place in the UK to which we have contributed
or have run, I think, throughout the last year and it runs to
a full page, covering every aspect. Indeed, if I were not here
today, I would be on exercise FORWARD STAR down in Warminster
which has a gold commander there and all the agencies looking
at one particular aspect of our ability to respond to a crisis,
so I think it is pretty comprehensive and grows annually as more
people, particularly the Cat 1 responders, come on board and start
running their own exercises, as they are mandated to do under
the Civil Contingencies Act.
Q201 Linda Gilroy: I take it that
that could be available to the Committee rather than running through
the detail of it. I think the other aspect I wanted to ask about,
and again you have given us something of the flavour of it, is
in relation to horizon-scanning, the response you gave to the
Chairman's question about what keeps you awake at night, but also,
when you said to us that you take your context from what the MoD
do, can you just give the Committee an idea of how that horizon-scanning
happens and how it affects what you plan?
General Sir David Richards: I
have prepared some stuff on this. Of course, it is the sort of
thing we do all the time when looking at deployed operations.
Here, the MoD are primarily responsible for horizon-scanning because
it does involve all government agencies and government departments,
but at a national level the Civil Contingencies Secretariat is
actually responsible for doing it and we play a role, particularly
when it gets down to the regional and local level, in validating
the sort of work that they are doing. I do not know, but do you,
James, get involved in the detail at the higher level because
that is really my bit of it?
Brigadier Everard: Not at the
moment. There is an MoD branch, and I think Brigadier Chip Chapman
was here at one of your earlier sessions, and that CT&UK Ops
Branch are our link into the Civil Contingencies Secretariat for
that high-level horizon-scanning. Beneath that, there is a raft
of work drawing on our own Concepts and Doctrine Centre and the
Defence Academy to refine our ability to respond. Again, because
it is difficult to articulate how much work there is unless you
see it, I would bring up here, because I think it might be of
interest, our own Standing Operation Instructions[1]
which represent all the contingency plans that exist, so, if you
want to know how to get a helicopter, this will tell you exactly
how many helicopters are available at any one time and where you
go to get them. If you want to know, you name it, how to get hold
of a communications specialist or someone from the Atomic Weapons
Establishment, it is all in here with phone numbers, and all of
that has really fallen out of the horizon-scanning work we have
done or drilling into those national resilience assessments or
assumptions that have fallen out of the Cabinet Office. Again,
I'll pass that round if people are interested to have a look at
it.
Q202 Chairman: Is that classified?
Brigadier Everard: That is not
classified,[2]
so we circulate that widely so that everybody involved in resilience
understands what we can do, and it is a sort of supporting adjunct
to the capabilities catalogue as a non-classified version and
again a classified version which underpins our ability to respond.
Q203 Linda Gilroy: So are there any other
things? I am trying to get this sort of balance between lessons
learned from previous civil emergencies, but also the picture
you have given us that that is changing, the civil response is
much better to that and that of course the threats that are there
are also changing. What are the other things that maybe do not
keep you awake at night, but which give you considerable pause
for thought?
General Sir David Richards: Well,
I would emphasise again that my focus is deployed operations,
so I have routinely a conscience in James Everard and his small
joint team that really are very dedicated, and they are also joint
because they are within HQ Land Forces, which is sometimes forgotten.
They are the ones that on a day-to-day basis are horizon-scanning,
doing the work with other government departments, particularly
the MoD. I think it is really terrorism and the sort of work the
Chairman mentioned of Chris Donnelly, who is a very good friend
of mine and in fact we are together later today, looking at the
full scale of where defence might have to be deployed over the
next ten to 20 years in an away-day, it is that sort of work that
I focus on to make sure that I come back and say to someone like
James, "Have we factored this into the work done by that
joint staff downstairs in our cellars?" It is not random,
but the work done focused on the UK is part of a much wider piece
of work, and I think that is probably right, going back to the
Chairman's point, that it is all so interlinked in a globalised
world that that is the way it has got to be, and then I cherry-pick
bits that I want then to focus on in respect of UK resilience.
Q204 Robert Key: General, the architecture
of all this is really rather complicated, is it not? We have got
the Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism in the Home Office,
the Prime Minister chairs a ministerial Committee on Security
and Terrorism and we have the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre
at MI5 in Thames House which reports to the Cabinet Office. How
do you ensure that the Ministry of Defence is kept in the loop?
On a day-to-day basis, is the Ministry of Defence actually keeping
up with the work of all those other agencies?
General Sir David Richards: Well,
there is a one-star director, Brigadier Chapman, who, I think,
has appeared in front of you, whose almost exclusive job is to
maintain those links, but I personally do not do it. I do not
want to flog a dead horse, but I am quite down the food chain
here. Whilst my staff keep tabs on it and I go on the odd exercise,
for me this is just one of many tasks that I can have laid on
me. I am content, from the times I am exposed to it, that the
relations seem to me to work, but I would say that they could
probably be a lot clearer and crisper and maybe that is one of
the things that will come out of the horizon-scanning work in
relation to 2012. My own view, having done a few overseas operations,
is that it was Omar Bradley that said that professionals talk
logistics and amateurs talk tactics. I have said for many years
now that actually professionals talk command and control first,
then logistics and then tactics, and I suppose that is a mantra
that has not yet permeated all the way through this particular
area and there are bureaucratic rivalries that we have got to
ease out. It works, but I suspect it could be better.
Q205 Robert Key: Do the Royal Navy
and the Royal Air Force act completely independently of you or,
as Standing Joint Commander, do you co-ordinate their military
aid to the civil authorities as well?
General Sir David Richards: Yes,
very much so. It is a joint headquarters and we again examined
it last summer. The Vice Chief of Defence has a meeting of the
three single Service Commanders-in-Chief every three months. We
went through this, they communed with their conscience, whether
they are unhappy with a soldier doing their bit, and they gave
me the thumbs-up. There is an option that the Chief of Defence
Staff could, in a particular circumstance, say, "I'm not
giving it to Richards, I'm giving it to Stanhope" or whoever
it might be, but most of the effects will be on the land and,
therefore, even though aircraft, for example, are involved, it
often usually would make sense for us to take the lead, and we
do this all the time anyway. We have this, as you will know, supporting
and supported relationship and I am the supported commander because
I am the one that will have to look after most of the impact of
any incident, but it works well. I can imagine that where it might
not, for example, be me could be if an oilrig were attacked and
there is no major obvious land role there, so I suspect that would
go to the Navy, for example.
Q206 Robert Key: The Committee visited
the Counter-Terrorism Science and Technology Centre at Porton
Down in my constituency in October and I think we were very impressed
by the vast range of activities they do and their immense capability
there. I think we got a sense that they were rather frustrated,
that they were fighting an uphill battle in persuading other government
agencies of what they can offer. Do you have a view on that and
how should they, or could they, be better promoted?
General Sir David Richards: Well,
I have been there and it is very impressive and I did pick up
the same worries. I think this is the point we are getting about
command and control. We need more clarity and the idea of SORs
that brings that clarity is something that we are hoping to see
during this year. To reassure you, when preparing for this session,
I dug into these things and they are on the case, as I said to
the Chairman at the beginning, though maybe I am getting a bit
impatient to see the results, but they are aware of that sort
of issue.
Q207 Chairman: That is particularly
in relation to, for example, 2012?
General Sir David Richards: I
think that, to be frank, sort of galvanised action, yes. Everyone
is aware that there are risks over that period that we want to
be fully prepared for in good time, and the organisation you have
referred to could play a key role in some of the possible scenarios
that are being examined, so we all ought to be quite clear who
does what and who is responsible to whom for what, and that area
is yet a bit murky.
Brigadier Everard: Just to add,
if I may, that particular organisation, which we have a lot of
contact with, works at the DSTL in Porton Down, but it is not
a DSTL agency, and actually works with the MoD and the Chief Scientific
Adviser, so they come and contribute to our exercises, but I understand
that it is his office that is driving the ability to take on that
role of a sort of one-stop shop for CT expertise.
Q208 Robert Key: Sir David, if I
could stay with these training exercises for a moment, and we
know they have them, how do you satisfy yourself that Army units
are ready to deploy in an emergency and work seamlessly with fire
brigades, the police and so on?
General Sir David Richards: Again,
I might ask James because James is responsible for it.
Brigadier Everard: For those niche
capabilities that we are mandated to provide, specific training
goes on to ensure that they are trained to the standard that they
need to train to. For augmented manpower, of course we are drawing
on the general capabilities of the Army, hence the fact we have
SJC headquarters located next to Land Commitments so that we can
identify the best courses to do the job that is required. I have
been doing this job for a year and nine times out of ten what
people are after is just trained manpower, a body of people who
can react to circumstances, and that is what we produce on a daily
basis anyway.
Q209 Robert Key: What specific training
do the Army, the Navy and the Air Force units have in preparation
for military assistance to civil authorities?
Brigadier Everard: Over and above
those troops that are pitched against those niche capabilities,
none. We do not specifically train our forces to contribute to
MACA; it is a task that falls out of their military training anyway.
General Sir David Richards: The
role that we tend to fill, picking up on James's point about what
the other agencies want, is quality-trained manpower. That is
what we are. The issues are not nearly as demanding normally,
we could do some horizon-scanning and obviously there are big
implications with some of the sort of worst-case things, but normally
all that this requires is a commander with a team that can analyse,
plan and implement quickly under pressure, and that is our core
business, so we do not think, for the vast majority of instances,
things like flood relief operations, for example, that it is that
difficult, given that that is what we practise in all the time,
albeit the subject matter is different. That does not mean that
we do not need sappers with boats because of course also they
do that on normal military operations, so, give or take the whole
raft of things, the 90% of the things we might be called in to
help over, they are there anyway, but, instead of applying it
to the operations in Iraq or Afghanistan, we apply it to probably
usually much-easier-to-cope-with, if I am frank, operations in
the UK.
Q210 Robert Key: Could I ask for
a little update on what is happening at the Chemical Biological
Radiological and Nuclear Centre at Winterbourne Gunner, where,
I know, the Army, Navy and Air Force attend for training in those
areas, and of course next to it is the Police National College
for Training as well. Is there co-ordination, therefore, between
the police and military forces at Winterbourne Gunner or are they
completely separate establishments?
Brigadier Everard: I do not know
the answer to that question and I have not been to Winterbourne
Gunner. Of course, in terms of our UK ops response to EOD, we
have the Joint Services EOD Centre at Didcot. They have a standing
authority to deploy in support of the civil authorities in the
event of a CBRN or actually an EOD requirement and they have very
good links with the other agencies, including maritime and indeed
police who provide those capabilities, so, on the exercises I
have been to, I have seen that joint training in action. Whether
at Winterbourne Gunner it takes place, I do not know.
General Sir David Richards: If
we may, can we come back to you on that?
Robert Key: Yes, please. I would be grateful.
Thank you very much.
Chairman: Moving on to funding and Bernard
Jenkin.
Q211 Mr Jenkin: How happy are you
with the funding arrangements for MACA?
General Sir David Richards: Well,
for what we are mandated to do at the moment, it seems to work.
If we provide an EOD team to another government department, Defence
gets paid for it and, therefore, it does not have to come out
of the Army's hide, for example. Whether it would work in a large-scale
disaster of some kind where a nuclear bomb was let off in the
docks or something like that, I can only imagine that it should
because, at the scale we are doing it, it seems to work very well,
but I suppose scale would then become a different issue, but we
have not had any problems with it to date.
Brigadier Everard: No. I think
the funding and repayment regime, the rules are set by the Treasury
and we apply them as best we can, so I think that works well.
For those niche capabilities, of course they are mandated in Defence
Planning Guidance and we are funded to provide those.
Q212 Mr Jenkin: But the DCDC publication
Operations in the UK: The Defence Contribution to Resilience
sets out the principles of funding, and the key principle seems
to be, "If the cost is not applicable to defence, then it
represents an improper use of resources and must be recovered",
but does that not inhibit capacity-building in the Ministry of
Defence and does that not discourage government departments from
using perhaps dormant capability because the cost of deploying
it is in fact prohibitive, particularly if you are going for full
recovery of costs?
General Sir David Richards: I
can identify with what you have just suggested, but, in a way
from a defence perspective, where our priority quite clearly now
is mandated to be on deployed operations outside the United Kingdom,
anything which, however accidentally, forces others to do what
they are supposed to do for fear that it will be more expensive
if they come to us maybe is not a bad thing. I suspect that has
been a catalyst for some of the investment, very good investment,
that we have seen in the last four years, so there is another
side to it. Should we do it for others? Well, there is an argument
for saying we should, but actually, as far as the Government is
concerned, it is not our job primarily anymore, but we are there
in support of others who should make the necessary investment.
Q213 Mr Jenkin: But, if it were easier
for you to support capacity to do some of these tasks, which of
course then would be available capacity for other tasks when not
required by MACA, that would be in the national interest, would
it not?
General Sir David Richards: Well,
I can absolutely understand that case, but we are not paid at
the moment to do it, so I would not want to do it unless it is
in the way that you have just described. We need to be properly
resourced to do any more and that is why we are so keen, and perhaps
it would be helpful if you emphasise this if you agree, that we
do tidy up what we are required to do through some sort of SOR
process that tells us this and then we will do it, but the rather
sort of `come as you are', which we have got to avoid, can be
muddling. We need to know what it is, pay us to do it and we will
provide the capability, but it is a little bit murky at the moment.
Q214 Mr Jenkin: But of course the
charging levels are rather malleable in that there can be full
costs' recovery, there can be marginal costs' recovery or the
costs might be waived.
General Sir David Richards: Yes.
Q215 Mr Jenkin: Are you happy that
this is stability in terms of what the Ministry of Defence is
going to get paid for? Are expectations fulfilled?
General Sir David Richards: So
far, normally our expectations have been fulfilled because it
is a collaborative effort. Have you got any more detail to help
answer that question because you get involved with it?
Brigadier Everard: Well, I am
lucky in the fact that the charging regime is an MoD responsibility
and, for example, I would expect the MoD to waive costs in the
event of a maxi Cat A saving-life venture. Intermediate costs,
if there was a training benefit to us, again we probably would
not seek recovery of costs, but again we are, I think, constrained
by the envelope we work in and that says that, for those tasks
you are not formally mandated to do in Defence Strategic Guidance,
you seek recovery of the money in the charging regime as set out
by the Treasury, so, unless those rules are changed, that is what
we will continue to do.
General Sir David Richards: Of
course we do not get involved in it. We provide the troops and
whatever might be required and then it is for the MoD to decide
the regime.
Q216 Mr Jenkin: I appreciate I am
asking slightly outside your remit, but it has been very helpful,
the answers you have been giving. There is a footnote about national
interest, that, "MoD will not waive costs on grounds of national
security". I think people would be rather surprised by that
statement. Can you think of any example when the national interest
criterion for waiving MACA charging has been fulfilled?
General Sir David Richards: I
do not know, but, I agree with you, I think it does sound rather
surprising.
Q217 Mr Jenkin: Would that be the
large-scale things?
General Sir David Richards: Yes,
that would come in that category. No, you are educating me; I
find that interesting.
Q218 Chairman: But putting context,
that statement is followed by, "Those aspects of national
security for which the MoD has responsibility are funded within
the defence budget", in other words, pretty much what you
have been saying—
General Sir David Richards: Yes.
Q219 Chairman:— that even national
security does, in certain circumstances, come under the budgets
of departments other than the Ministry of Defence.
General Sir David Richards: Yes.
1 Note by witness: Edition 3, as at 9 July 2008. Back
2
Note by witness: It has been deliberately kept at RESTRICTED. Back
|
