MoD risks its reputation by countering migrant crossings, says report
The defence committee has today published its report examining the use of the military to counter migrant crossings, in which it argues that the situation risks the MoD’s public reputation.
The committee states that a public disagreement between two Great Offices of State, played out in the House and on Twitter, is deeply unedifying and undermines public confidence in government.
The committee finds that the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD) engagement in Operation Isotrope potentially poses significant reputational risks. Those risks may come from a number of areas: some argue that this is not a defence task but ought to be carried out by civil authorities, that the Royal Navy has other, more pressing priorities, or that the Navy will be legally unable to be effective in the role, instead becoming a ‘taxi service’ for migrants crossing the Channel.
The report also says the MoD budget is already inadequate. The report finds that adding responsibility forcountering immigrationin the Channel without a further uplift in the budget takes scarce resources from an already overstretched Department. It is unclear why this operation is not being treated as a MACA request and accordingly resourced by the Home Office.
The committee calls on the government to set out which existing Royal Navy commitments will be given up in order to divert resources to Operation Isotrope.
The Committee concludes that Operation Isotrope cannot be an open-ended deployment, occupying scarce Royal Naval vessels and personnel. The report calls for a clear end point, at which the operation will be handed back over to the Border Force.
The report finds that there is an overall lack of clarity from the government on the announcement, which appears to be made prematurely, before the details of the policy have been finalised. The committee questions whether announcing the policy before agreeing the detail was a wise move or rather one borne of desperation.
The committee urges the government to reconsider its refusal to publish the details of strategic and operational responsibility. The fact that, six weeks on from the initial announcement, the government is still unable (or unwilling) to answer questions about this issue does not inspire confidence.
Vice-Chair of the defence committee, John Spellar MP, said: “The decision to call in the Armed Forces to address migrant crossings has far-reaching implications across government, yet fundamental questions remain over Operation Isostrope. The Services cannot become a fourth blue light service.
“As we’ve made clear in recent reports, the Ministry of Defence, and especially the Royal Navy, is already over-stretched and under-resourced. An additional responsibility, particularly one as substantial as intercepting Channel migrant crossings, places huge pressure on a department with a demanding-enough brief.
“In order to meet the demands of this new policy, we should be under no illusion that sacrifices to defence will be made elsewhere. The government should set clear parameters for Operation Isotrope and announce a definitive end date and handover back to the Border Force.
“It is evident that, as it stands, the Border Force is in need of more equipment and resources. For the health of our defence industry, the government should ensure that any new ships acquired by the Border Force are built and bought in Britain.
“Operation Isotrope threatens to tarnish the Royal Navy’s reputation, particularly in the absence of any clear communications from government. Reputationally, the Ministry of Defence has little to gain and much to lose.
“The policy announcement left much to be desired. Squabbling between the Great Offices of State severely undermines public confidence in government. Government policies should be carefully planned and considered, not rushed out to quash less-than-favourable frontpages.
“It is unfortunate that the government has been less than forthcoming in providing answers to the committee’s questions. Six weeks on from the policy announcement, government is still either unable or unwilling to discuss Operation Isotrope. Calling in the Navy is not a quick fix to a sticky issue. The government should prioritise outcomes over optics.”
