The Blunderful Dr Fox

So the news has come though that Dr Liam Fox has resigned as Secretary of State for Defence. As Dr Fox wrote in his resignation letter to the Prime Minister he had "mistakenly allowed" his personal and professional responsibilities to become "blurred".

After a week of trying to defend himself more than the country over allegations that his best man Adam Werrity had unparalleled to the Defence Secretary and his contacts both at the MoD and on his overseas trips. He has finally fallen on his figurative sword.

He claims that the consequences of the close access his close friend has had to foreign leaders and their retinue when they have been meeting with the representative of the UK Government has only become apparent to him in recent days. Going on to say:

"I have also repeatedly said that the national interest must always come before personal interest.

"I now have to hold myself to my own standard. I have therefore decided, with great sadness, to resign from my post as secretary of state for defence."

It has somehow taken Dr Fox longer than most of the rest of us have taken to see the issues of access and frequency of which Mr Werrity had that access as an issue in one of the most secure Ministers and his meetings with key people.

The resignation comes after it was revealed that a private intelligence firm and a property company that lobbies the UK on behalf of Israel had been funding the many travels of Mr Werrity to the tune of £147,000.

If Mr Fox was getting alternative non-Civil Service advice on a regular basis from a friend employed by people with a number of vested interests it is something that David Cameron why hasn't the PM taken action sooner. After all at conference he said:

"If we fool ourselves that we can do these things without effort, without correcting past mistakes, without confronting vested interests and failed ideas, then no, we’re not going to get anywhere.

"But if we put in the effort, correct those mistakes, confront those vested interests and take on the failed ideas of the past, then I know we can turn this ship around."

Mr Fox has been fooling himself about his friend surely not being wholly on the periphery of overseas events that he attended, as he claimed. Surely he must have known that the frequency with which he turned up was something untoward, especially if as he claims he was not representing him in either an official or unofficial capacity.

But if these vest interests have managed to work so close to the heart of government for one minister you have to ask how many of them are working elsewhere? Cameron seems to think that the only vested interests we have in this country are the unions, what about the businesses that have vested interests that the Conservative party have long pandered to. They would probably hope to continue to do so unchecked if it weren't for the Liberal Democrats also in government.

Next time you have a business trip abroad take me your bestest friend

I have a number of friends who work all over the world travelling to meetings here and there. Apart from the ones who have traveled for the same work purposes or have traveled to where I am, very few of them have seen me on the margins of any of their work meetings.

But apparently the Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox has encountered his friend Adam Werrity on the margins of 18 of his foreign trips. This appears to be on top of the 14 trips to his Ministry of Defence offices since May of last year.

Now surely the foreign secretary's itinerary of foreign trips is one of those that is protected by the official secrets act. After all we are at war in Afghanistan and recently in Iraq and the terrorist threat still exists in many parts of Africa and Asia. But as one of these chance encounters was apparently at a military airbase as Dr Fox was transferring flights to Afghanistan. Yeah that is airbase not airport, but apparently to transfer to a civilian aircraft. Surely the only reason to transfer there, would have been during the Arab Spring uprisings, when surely Mr Werrity and the other arms dealers defence industry businessmen would surely have been advised not to travel to Dubai.

I'm not that keen on fox hunting, but I smell a rat.

Although if you are going on a business trip overseas and wouldn't mind seeing me on the margins of it and your work may well pay me to be there as an advisor or something, give us a call, my diary is pretty empty at present.

Generals Back Clegg Over Trident

What do Field Marshal Lord Bramall, General Lord Ramsbotham, General Sir Hugh Beach and Major-General Patrick Cordingley have in common? Well today they have all written to The Times backing the Liberal Democrats policy on not replacing Trident, that's what.

They say that the next government would threaten both front line Forces and global disarmament talks unless it considers different ways of spending the billions required to replace the fleet of submarines. They also express "deep concerns" that Trident has been omitted from the Strategic Defence Review scheduled for after the election. They argue that any review should look at the questions:

"Is the UK's security best served by going ahead with business as usual, reducing our nuclear arsenal, adjusting our nuclear posture or eliminating our nuclear weapons?"

The best defence the other side comes up with is this from Paul Beaver, a defence analyst:

"This is not a military programme. This is a national programme. It is about Britain’s place in the world. It is about our relationship with the United States most of all."

So there you have it folks Trident isn't military. If we do away with our nuclear Tridents America who is threatening countries gaining nuclear capability will no longer be our friend. I'm still trying to get my head round any logic in that statement, I've given up.

General Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank however adds weight to the Generals' case saying:

"Do we really need the kind of effective weapon we had in the Cold War? There is quite an argument to say we do not."

I seem to remember Nick Clegg using almost that form of words last Thursday.

Joyce Tells Gordon Get a Grip....On Defence

Eric Joyce has chosen the 70th Anniversary of the declaration of War on Hitler's Germany to resign as the parliamentary private secretary to Defence Minister Bob Ainsworth. In his

he tells the Prime Minster to get a grip. Not actually in those words but he concludes saying:

"I believe the next election is ours to win, thanks greatly to your personal great economic success. But we cannot win unless we grip defence. Above all, Labour must remember that service folk and their families are our people. We say that we honour them for their risk, bravery and sacrifice and we must at literally all costs continue to show by our actions that we mean it."

His letter is a strong rebuke on the war senior members of his own party are attacking senior military personnel while keeping those very experienced voices silent.

"Behind the hand attacks by any Labour figure on senior service personnel are now, to the public, indistinguishable from attacks on the services themselves. Conversely, in my view we should allow our service personnel greater latitude to voice their views on matters which make distinctions between defence and politics pointless."

No doubt the man who resigned his commission as a Major just 10 years ago has like that other former soldier 70 years ago kept his ear to the ground with his former colleagues. Like Churchill he is saying that something needs to be done, something that he feels cannot be done despite his experience from inside the MoD at the moment.

He also says that he does not think that "the public will accept for much longer that our losses can be justified by simply referring to the risk of greater terrorism on our streets." Going on to talk about the uncertainty about British forces continued deployment in Afghanistan.

However, he does note that a British withdrawal leaving the USA to fight on alone "would mean the end of NATO as a meaningful proposition" all the while acknowledging the proud tradition of British forces punching well above their weight.

It is an interesting time to go, although he said that the decision was made some weeks ago. The choice of today seventy years on from when Neville Chamberlain announced to the nation, "I have to tell you now that no such undertaking (withdrawal from Poland) has been received and consequently this country is now at war with Germany," can surely not have been overlooked by a military man.

Consequence? I think not. I mean the man is a mature* Sandhurst Graduate and was commissioned into the Royal Army Educational Corps.

Update: Subrosa has asked me to point on a couple of occasions in the comments to point out that Eric started as a private in the Black Watch at 18 before leaving to get a degree at 21, entering Sandhurst and becoming a mature 'cadet' at 27. As this does point out that he know live in the ranks, officers' mess and the difficulties being a mature officer cadet can bring, I have decided to add the detail, as it shows the mans possibly unique grasp of Army matters even further from the current green benches.

Eric Joyce's Resignation Letter

Hat tip to Channel 4 News

Gordon Brown MP
10 Downing Street
LONDON

3 September 2009

Gordon

As you may know, I told Bob Ainsworth some weeks ago that I intended to step down as Parliamentary Private Secretary (PPS) to the Defence Secretary before the start of the new parliamentary term. This seems to me the least disruptive time to do that. I have been privileged to work as PPS to four senior Labour ministers in four government departments and now feel that I can make my best contribution to the Labour effort in parliament by concentrating on helping, as a regular back-bencher, to show that Labour remains sound on matters of Defence.

Labour was returned to power in 1997 on the back of your great success in turning the Economy from a weakness into a strength for Labour. Our continuing success in helping people from all parts of society become more prosperous, while helping the least well-off most, is built upon that. More quietly, during the 90's, Labour's then shadow defence team showed how Labour had become, after the disaster of the early 1980s, 'sound' on Defence. It seems to me that your personal success on the economy won the deal in 1997, while colleagues at Defence sealed it.

We are now, I think, once again at a critical time for Labour and Defence. The Conservatives, of course opportunistically, think they can convince the public that we have lost our empathy with the Defence community. We must not allow this to happen. I know that you have great commitment to our armed forces and this was clear when you visited Afghanistan this week, yet there seem to me to be some problems which need fixing with the greatest urgency.

As you know, two Black Watch soldiers gave their lives during your visit. I do not think the public will accept for much longer that our losses can be justified by simply referring to the risk of greater terrorism on our streets. Nor do I think we can continue with the present level of uncertainty about the future of our deployment in Afghanistan.

I think we must be much more direct about the reality that we do punch a long way above our weight, that many of our allies do far too little, and that leaving the field to the United States would mean the end of NATO as a meaningful proposition. The British people have a proud history of facing such realities. They understand the importance of the allied effort in Afghanistan/Pakistan and I think they would appreciate more direct approach by politicians. We also need to make it clear that our commitment in Afghanistan is high but time limited. It should be possible now to say that we will move off our present war-footing and reduce our forces there substantially during our next term in government.

We also need a greater geopolitical return from the United States for our efforts. For many, Britain fights; Germany pays, France calculates; Italy avoids. If the United States values each of these approaches equally, they will end up shouldering the burden by themselves. The first place to start is an acceptance this week by them, and by the Afghanistan electoral authorities, that there must be a second round in the elections there. I do not think the British people will support the physical risk to our servicemen and women unless they can be given confidence that Afghanistan's government has been properly elected and has a clear intent to deal with the corruption there which has continued unabated in recent years.

Most important of all, we must make it clear to every serviceman and woman, their families and the British public that we give their well-being the highest political priority. Behind the hand attacks by any Labour figure on senior service personnel are now, to the public, indistinguishable from attacks on the services themselves. Conversely, in my view we should allow our service personnel greater latitude to voice their views on matters which make distinctions between defence and politics pointless.

I believe the next election is ours to win, thanks greatly to your personal great economic success. But we cannot win unless we grip defence. Above all, Labour must remember that service folk and their families are our people. We say that we honour them for their risk, bravery and sacrifice and we must at literally all costs continue to show by our actions that we mean it.

I intend to do what modest amount I can to help from the back-benches.

Yours sincerely

Eric Joyce MP

****Breaking**** Eric Joyce Resigns as PPS to Defence Secretary

Former Army major and MP for Falkirk Eric Joyce has resigned as the parliamentary private secretary to the Defece Secretary, Bob Ainsworth. In his letter he is critical of the Government and particularly the Labour Parties handling of Afghanistan. His army career started in the Black Watch who have recently lost two of their number in Afghanistan.

More to follow.