Brown comes under attack over evidence to Iraq inquiry.

Nick 0208 Ldn

By David Brown, Michael Evans and Deborah Haynes
6 March 2010

Former commanders accused Gordon Brown of deliberately misleading the Iraq inquiry after he blamed the military for failing properly to equip the Armed Forces for war.

The Prime Minister denied putting the lives of British troops at risk by starving the military of equipment. In a confident performance yesterday at the Chilcot inquiry, he admitted curbing spending while troops were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan to stop public finances spiralling out of control. But he insisted this had not affected soldiers on the front line.

Admiral Lord Boyce, the Chief of the Defence Staff up to the start of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, disagreed. “He’s dissembling, he’s being disingenuous. It’s just not the case that the Ministry of Defence was given everything it needed,” he said.

“There may have been a 1.5 per cent increase in the defence budget but the MoD was starved of funds.”

Year on year when Mr Brown was Chancellor it failed to get the money it needed to meet the level of activity demanded by the Government, he said.

Mr Brown said that every request for money for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and occupation of Iraq was swiftly approved by the Treasury. He shifted the blame on to generals when confronted with complaints from the relatives of soldiers killed by in attacks on Snatch Land Rovers.

Colonel Stuart Tootal, former commander of 3rd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment, said: “I am quite staggered by the lack of any sense of responsibility. He was the man with the purse strings.”

The Prime Minister repeatedly expressed sorrow for the British and Iraqi deaths. He told the inquiry: “I think this is the gravest decision to go to war. It was the right decision and it was for the right reasons.”

A No10 spokesman said: "The Prime Minister could not have been clearer in responses to repeated questions about military funding. Every request that the military commanders made to us for equipment was answered. No request was ever turned down."

Ex-defence chief attacks Brown's evidence to Iraq inquiry - Times Online

rednev

...

He was indeed the man with the purse strings, and as he told the inquiry, the Treasury granted every single request for money from the MoD. So what exactly are the generals prattling on about?

Yet another baseless attack on Gordon Brown.

EZee

which seems such a waste when there is just so many things to attack him on

Team Brian GB

It is extraordinary how time and again there is battle between this prime minister and the military.

Nick 0208 Ldn

Are you saying that you trust the word of Gordon Brown, at best someone who is rationing with matters of truth and at worst...well people can use their own adjectives, over these two men? They know not at all what they are talking about?

Maybe these requests were verbal ones, maybe they knew so completely beforehand the uselessness of even requesting such.

Yes, Sir Richard Dannatt did so in post even, Lord Guthrie in the years since his retirement.

rednev

It's not all that surprising when you consider the makeup of our armed forces' top rank, and you know exactly what I mean by that.

Do you honestly believe that there wasn't a political agenda when General Richard Dannatt (the now Tory defense advisor) was sniping at Brown and the Labour government towards the end of his tenure as head of the Army?

Personally, I'd like to see ex-military commanders with clear political bias keep their traps shut on political matters.

The Prime Minister is hardly going to lie about something that would so easily be exposed. And I don't think the 'we didn't bother asking' defense is one that can be taken seriously, not unless they want to admit incompetence.

As I pointed out in my post addressing Team Brian's point, Dannatt had declared his intention to join the Conservative Party before he had even left his position in the army. He had a clear political agenda.

Team Brian GB

Whilst Dannatts positions can be attacked more for assisting the conservatives (you could make the argument that in his priviledged position he is best positioned to judge how the government has supported the military). It goes much deeper than that, the general staff as a whole are always critical of the amount of resources they receive, the MoD is absolutely detested by the military - who base their job performance on their bureaucraticefficiency rather than on military operations, the forces are in total overstretched whilst numbers are getting cut and cut. Plus the whole saga about the helicopters in Afghanistan is correct, there is far too little air support for troops there, let alone the travesty that is the still flying Nimrod, the next to useless jeeps that provide no protection, and the new troop carrying aircraft that will not arrive until after the main deployment to the country is scheduled to finish.

It isn't difficult to come to the conclusion that the general staff have merits to their arguments when complaining about the military, if I were Richard Dannatt in such a position I would want to assist the opposition as well - remember the time as well when Brown was supposed to call his election and announced massive troop withdrawals from Iraq timed during the tory conference? I'm sure that went down like a lead balloon in Aldershot.

topper

So Brown is not lying and the Generals are lying ffs


So documented shortages of helicopters, body armour amoured vehicles, telecom equipment, footware, bullets even - are all a figment of troops imagination. Yes Mr Clown I believe you I really do and pigs are flying past my window as I type

topper

Agree and personally I would like Clown to stop lying through his teeth and not weep crocodile tears over troop deaths but it aint going to happen so we are both going to be disappointed

Mozza

Shortages does not necessarily point to a lack of money, getting hold of armour and weapons is I imagine a long exercise, they have to be built and shipped, you can't go and get a helicopter from Tesco

topper

Clown cut the budget for helicopters - and I do recall that we were offered US helicopters but this offer was declined

and getting bullets a long exercise

Mozza

He'd only have cut the budget is they weren't asked for

Sultan

The generals have their priorities, as did Gordon Brown. Life is full of compromises.

topper

they were budgeted for by the Armed Forces so yes they were requested and
cut from the budget by Clown

since Clowns elevation to PM he's consistently said we had enough helicopters and he's consistently been shown lying

topper

When you send your troops into battle and ask them to die for their country one would expect them to be equipped properly. Like giving them sufficient bullets

Sultan

The people making decisions to go to war should think of the consequences. The armed forces are not alone in the chancellors list of priorities. The country has spent around 18 billion pounds in Iraq and Afghanistan.

topper

Blair n Clown and the rest of the idiots - dodgy dossier n all - decided to go to war and yes they should have thought of the consequences but surprise surprise they didn't

Mozza

Thats for the mod to buy and the army to ship, I doubt it was for lack of funds

topper

redtilded121

seems to me that a lot of cash is poured in at the top and not enough is reaching the bottom in the right way as was the case with the body armour which there was plenty of it just was in the wrong place.
i reckon that there are a lot of donkeys in charge of our lions ,protecting their own pensions and expense accounts and finding unpopular politicians an easy target.

Nick 0208 Ldn

Nico Hines and Philippe Naughton
17 March 2010

Gordon Brown was today forced into a humiliating retreat in his battle against retired generals who accuse him of giving disingenuous evidence on military funding to the Iraq Inquiry.

The Prime Minister told the House of Commons that he now accepted that his evidence had been wrong. He admitted that defence spending “did not rise in real terms” in every year under the Labour government and said he had written to Sir John Chilcot to clarify his controversial claims.

Throughout his testimony, Mr Brown repeatedly insisted that military spending had increased in every year since 1997 and claimed that every urgent operational request was met immediately.

His claims were greeted by incredulity amongst retired generals including the former Chief of Defence Staff General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank and former defence chief, Admiral Lord Boyce. They accused him of giving deliberately misleading evidence to the inquiry.

During Prime Minister’s Questions today, Mr Brown admitted that his evidence was incorrect in a response to Tony Baldry, the Conservative MP for Banbury.

“Yes. I am already writing to Sir John Chilcot about this issue,” he told MPs “Because of operational fluctuations in the way the money is spent, expenditure has risen in cash terms every year, in real terms it is 12% higher, but I do accept that in one or two years defence expenditure did not rise in real terms.”

David Cameron responded to the admission by congratulating Mr Baldry for extracting an admission from Mr Brown.

"In three years of asking the Prime Minister questions I don't think I've ever heard him making a correction or retraction,” he said. “Perhaps, on the day when he has to admit that he can't get his own figures right we shouldn't have to put up with him talking about Conservative policy."

Former military commanders had accused Mr Brown of misleading the inquiry when he appeared to blame the military for failing to equip the Armed Forces properly.

Admiral Lord Boyce said: “He’s dissembling, he’s being disingenuous. It’s just not the case that the Ministry of Defence was given everything it needed.”

As the bitter row escalated Labour backbenchers appeared to suggest that remarks by retired military officials criticising Mr Brown were motivated by party political affiliations.

Gordon Brown admits evidence at Iraq Inquiry was wrong - Times Online



The Lib Dems' Simon Hughes was also just saying that they've gone back on a pledge over public funding for the nuclear industry.

2 for 1 day at No 10 perhaps.

Trust...

topper

Clown seems to have mastered Bliars art of being economical with the truth. it was 3 and perhaps 4 years.

It is interesting that when Clowns spokesman was asked exactly when Clown had realised his er "error" the answer was not forthcoming - funny that

Nick 0208 Ldn

So they say, the letter that he has written to Lord Chilcot is lacking in contrition of any nature. Indeed it is three pages long with graphs and diagrams and flow charts aplenty, almost as if to say "i am right no matter what".

When you consider how many times he has uttered the words "increased in real terms" and "every year" as of late, it is quite starting to think that it was simply an error. In fact i doubt there are many who actually do reckon on that being the reason.

Poor show on the Tories' part that it took as long as it did to expose the matter really.

For whom i'll have no smiles or support if they impose cuts on the navy as might be their want. Particularly with savings available elsewhere and us without any carriers at present [well except for the HMS Ocean and that is a helicopter carrier].

topper

This Government has a long history of lies and a lack of contrition. Clown amply demonstrates this fact with his treatment of the armed forces over the budgets and then using them for photo opportunities and as a political tool.

I agree with you that the Tories were slow in getting the true facts out into public domain. I also wonder why they have not made more capital out of the money actually spent . Clown says that the budget is 12% higher in real terms overall. But when one considers that the base figure from which this growth is calculated was a peacetime budget having been reduced due to the cold war thaw. Then Labour dragging us into 2 major wars - one still ongoing - perhaps a 12% increase overall is not summat to be proud of.

Perhaps somebody with more info can advise how much of this 12% figure is made up by the last two budgets when Clown started to feel uncomfortable by the political and public criticism of his treatment of our underfunded armed forces and was forced to produce more cash

surf

Some pretty damning evidence today from Buller, then head of MI5. This report from the Guardian:

topper

another thing we have to thank New Labour - alias Blair n Brown for