Morning:
8°c
Dannatt is no stooge says Hague as row over general’s role grows
Nicholas Cecil, Deputy Political Editor8 Oct 2009
Senior Tories were today forced to defend former Army chief Sir Richard Dannatt, who is due to become an adviser to their party.
Shadow foreign secretary William Hague denied that Sir Richard was a “Tory stooge” after the military chief was criticised for aligning himself with a political party so soon after stepping down as head of the Army earlier this summer.
Whitehall insiders are concerned that Sir Richard's decision could damage relations between defence chiefs and ministers in future.
Tory MPs also believe Sir Richard's attacks on the Government over Afghanistan will now be devalued given his Conservative links. But speaking on BBC Breakfast, Mr Hague said: “I don't think there is anything stooge-like about Richard Dannatt.”
Mr Hague insisted that Britain could benefit from former Chief of the General Staff Sir Richard offering advice on how to defeat the Taliban insurgency.
Sir Richard is expected to be made a peer if the Tories win the next general election.
But General Lord Guthrie, a former Chief of the Defence Staff, advised him not to take the Tory whip. “If he's going to the House of Lords, it's best to be a crossbencher,” he said. “I will give advice to anyone, Labour or Conservative but I wouldn't want to be associated with any one political party.”
Sir Richard has accused the Prime Minister of ignoring military advice to send more troops to Afghanistan and of failing to provide enough equipment, particularly helicopters.
Reports were circulating that he had expressed a wish to be made Defence Secretary, which has alarmed some people at the Ministry of Defence. They fear that could lead to clashes with the serving defence chiefs.
Labour MPs have warned of “blurring” the lines between the military and political chain of command.
Lord Foulkes, a Labour peer, accused Sir Richard of working “hand in glove” with the Conservatives. Labour has been accused of seeking to smear the former Army chief over his expenses and there was speculation today this campaign could be reignited.
But Tory MPs were also concerned that their party may score an own goal over appointing Sir Richard. One backbencher said: “This devalues his currency. It would have been better to announce this after the election.”
Former Navy chief Lord West of Spithead was made a security minister by Mr Brown but he is seen to have been out of the MoD for sufficient time.
New force to combat terror
A new military force on permanent standby to counter terror attacks would be set up under the Tories, the party's security minister said today. Baroness Neville-Jones accused the Government of leaving the country “vulnerable” to militants targeting London as happened in Mumbai last year when nearly 200 people died.
Reader views (13)
This is a grave error of judgement on both Cameron's part and on Dannatt's part. This country is a democracy. we may not always like the result personally but the elected government is the elected government. The Armed Forces are servants of the political will of the government that we elect.
A head of any branch of the Armed Services should express his views firmly and strongly through channels privately but musty not get politically involved. Certainly not whilst the government he served under is still in office.
We are in great danger of becoming like many South American and other countries where the military is a political force. We must not let that happen. Dannatt should have refused the offer or at least said he would decide AFTER the election (even if he privately gave his consent off the record) To announce this side of an election is a grave error and Cameron MUST withdraw the offer and now rule Dannatt out for the foreseeable future.
- Richard, Cheltenham, 08/10/2009 23:04
Report abuse
All the old public school boys at it again, Jobs for the boys. Only Sandhurst, Eton, and Cambridge need apply.
Imagine what its going to be like when they are actually in power? Get ready for Dannatt to demand more working class cannon fodder to defend the realm, whilst Cameron demolishes the social services.
Vote for this mob, you've got to be joking.
- James, Manchester England, 08/10/2009 21:57
Report abuse
Unwritten rule you do not sign up with any political party whilst a serving officer in HM service SHAME ON YOU
- Steve, England, 08/10/2009 21:45
Report abuse
This is a grave error of judgement on both Cameron's part and on Dannatt's part. This country is a democracy. we may not always like the result personally but the elected government is the elected government. The Armed Forces are servants of the political will of the government that we elect.
A head of any branch of the Armed Services should express his views firmly and strongly through channels privately but musty not get politically involved. Certainly not whilst the government he served under is still in office.
We are in great danger of becoming like many South American and other countries where the military is a political force. We must not let that happen. Dannatt should have refused the offer or at least said he would decide AFTER the election (even if he privately gave his consent off the record) To announce this side of an election is a grave error and Cameron MUST withdraw the offer and now rule Dannatt out for the foreseeable future.
- Richard, Cheltenham, 08/10/2009 20:40
Report abuse
Roz, France.
We are in a War that is debatably illegal in the first place and the men who were on those planes on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia whom our arms trade has had many a lucrative deal with. The man we were looking for, that was meant to be hiding out in a remote cave in Afghanistan was on kidney dialysis. Surely to bump him off it would have been much more efficient in the long run to simply turn Afghanistan’s electricity supply off for a week or two? If just one of our Generals could explain the real reason we are in Afghanistan I’d be delighted to be enlightened.
- Ann, Grimsby, 08/10/2009 17:44
Report abuse
Rogan, Irving
My box was already constructed for me. My stepfather served 22 years as a Staff Sergeant in the Parachute Regiment so yes perhaps I am biased when I observe the old school tie boys lining their own pockets and justifying Wars of their own making for self gratification. If Dannatt was a man of principle he would have sacrificed his own pension by resigning from the military instead of sacrificing the lives of our young men as he was leading them into a battle that he must have blatantly know was un winnable from the start. As he must have been advising our government for some time now whilst leading the charge and we are still in this quagmire I feel he wants sacking for incompetence not a promotion. As for my intellect? I thought it was the Generals integrity that was in question.
- Ann, Grimsby, 08/10/2009 17:01
Report abuse
Anne of Grimsby: I hope the mothers of all the young men who haved died trying to protect you from being blown up by Muslim fanatics post 9/11 feel you were worth it.
Why should all the people serving in the Armed Forces - and paying their income tax too - not have some proper representation in the Government that has deployed them in Ireland, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, as fire-fighters and to clear up and burn loads of dead cows? If you feel so strongly about the Arms Trade, why don't you go and protest somewhere rather more sinister, like China? Only a moron would think it not a good idea to have a former head of the Army advising a Government that is at war.
- Roz, France, 08/10/2009 16:34
Report abuse
One backbencher said: “This devalues his currency. It would have been better to announce this after the election.”
No, that would come across as under-handed and would rightly be used to attack a new Tory administration. I think Britain has had enough of that from Labour to last a life-time.
- Rogan, Irving, 08/10/2009 16:06
Report abuse
Ann, Grimsby - you really do need to stop thinking with your gut. Do you perhaps suggest the ex-career military officer should move into healthcare or banking as a follow-on career? Although not an absolute, choices in career path have a tendency to narrow down as people get older, purely as a result of experience and interests.
As a heads-up, there's more to real-life than observers like you (or me) with personal opinions can put a handle on. The trick is to recognise that very few people have mastered walking on water over the centuries - our gut-instincts, no matter what they are based upon, are not always right. Occasionally, we need to look outside our own self-constructed boxes and apply the intellect we all have to the observable universe of everyday life.
- Rogan, Irving, 08/10/2009 15:30
Report abuse
Clearly, expert advice is going to be critical to an incoming Tory administration. I think the problem occurs when expert advice is received but then ignored. It depends for what reason said advice is ignored, is it because the relevant Minister has access to more information or is it because those in Government simply think they are superior to everyone else and, hence, are the decision makers.
Whatever the reason, the fact is that we have had 12 years of Labour trying to do it their way and all they seem to do is cause conflict and rubbish people who do not share their view.
Time for a new collaborative approach.
- Ian Gilbertson, Newcastle, 08/10/2009 13:41
Report abuse
Isn't it time Lord Foulkes worked WITH people, not against them?
I am tired of hearing the trumpeting of this irrelevant elderly Bull Elephant, as he thrashes around in the long grass trying to attract attention to himself.
- Matt, Telford England, 08/10/2009 12:40
Report abuse
If he was that bothered he would still be in the job not chasing the £££££££
- Barry, London, 08/10/2009 11:36
Report abuse
Defence Secretaries in Britain also have the job of procuring contract’s for the arms industry. I believe one of the arguments is that we need more equipment “Gordon” securing even more record profits for a corporate industry that uses tax payers money but has no moral accountability what so ever. Apparently the job of regulating “morality” belongs to the Government. How very clever of an unregulated corporate arms industry to slip their very own representative into the heart of a British Government whilst getting the British tax payer to provide both wages and even more record profits for an industry with no accountability. In the meantime our boys are still dieing but we’ll let our “elected” representatives take the wrap for that. If I didn’t know any better I’d say were walking blindfolded into a military/corporate coup dictatorship and given the tradition of “jobs for the boys” the next move? Marshall Law.
- Ann, Grimsby, 08/10/2009 10:28
Report abuse
