The Report of the Iraq Inquiry

168. He also stated that there was not a direct link between the MOD’s Defence

Planning Assumptions and the “degree of stretch”. Each operation was different and

required different capabilities. Deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan had stretched

different capabilities to different degrees; it was a “matter of military judgement” whether

the Armed Forces were overstretched. Manning requirements (which flowed from the

Defence Planning Assumptions) would be reviewed at the next spending review.

169. In early March 2007, Gen Dannatt wrote to Mr Browne:

“Two overall themes dominated my introductory letter [of 31 August 2006]: the Army

is running hot; and the ‘military covenant’ is out of balance. I am pleased to say

that I think both these concerns are now well understood across the Department

and, importantly, we are taking steps to address both. Nevertheless … the level

of operational commitments is still well above Defence Planning Assumptions and

looks set to remain so for some years. There is now an acceptance, however,

that the Army is effectively fully operationally committed and hence any rebalance

between theatres – as we will undertake this year in Iraq and Afghanistan – has

to be a ‘zero sum’…”107

170. Gen Dannatt:

• welcomed the Operational Allowance and the recent pay award which together

sent Service Personnel a “powerful message” on how highly they were valued;

• confirmed that the “general care” provided to casualties was, slowly, improving;

the issue would continue to require constant, senior level attention; and

• restated his concerns that there was a risk of a “cliff-edge fall” in Army manning

(although retention was holding up, recruitment was falling).

171. The PAC published its report on recruitment and retention in the Armed Forces

in June 2007.108 It echoed the conclusions and recommendations of the NAO’s

November 2006 report. The PAC reported that:

“Deployments overseas have been more frequent because the Department has

been operating above Defence Planning Assumptions for several years and

manning levels have not kept pace with commitments … Decisions about whether

the Armed Forces can undertake operations above the Assumptions are matter

of military judgement. The Department intends to review [the] Defence Planning

Assumptions and the funding of the Armed Forces in the light of the demands

placed on them, as part of the next Comprehensive Spending Review.”

107 Minute CGS to SofS [MOD], [undated], [untitled].

108 Thirty-fourth Report from the Public Accounts Committee, Session 2006-2007, Recruitment and

Retention in the Armed Forces, HC43.

32