Terror focus ‘hits security work’

by | Jan 30, 2008


Margaret Beckett has become the new chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, succeeding Paul Murphy who got moved in last week’s reshuffle. Murphy’s legacy to Beckett and the ISC is the Committee’s annual report, published today and which no doubt will capture some headlines in the media and set eyes rolling around Whitehall. According to BBC news:

The work of the UK’s intelligence services is suffering because of the focus on counter-terrorism. [The report] says that extra funding for the services may be needed. The head of MI6, John Scarlett, told the committee that counter-terrorism accounted for more than half of his security service’s workload and they had no ” choice but to prioritise” this area.

The ISC report goes on: “We are concerned that aspects of key intelligence and security work are suffering as a consequence of the focus on counter-terrorism priorities. “We believe consideration may need to be given to separate, additional funding to maintain the agencies’ capabilities in these areas.”

So what are the areas that are lacking in resources? The ISC report outlines the proportionate reduction in resources dedicated to tackle areas – although deletions for security reasons do detract somewhat from the degree of clarity provided, as the report’s list demonstrates:

– ***

– *** (in the case of the Security Service);

– ***

– *** (for the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS); and

– ***

– ***

– *** (in the case of GCHQ)

I am not the first and won’t be the last to make the point that while the threat from terrorism is real the Government and intelligence agencies risk missing things if they continue to focus solely on terrorism, after all terrorism is but one of a number of risks the UK faces.

I don’t think extra resources are the answer; and I hope there is someone in the bowels of Whitehall thinking of a plan B, C or D, because they probably won’t receive any more funding either. After all, they’ve just been given a 20 per cent increase in real terms. Instead they might consider collaborating more with other agencies and Whitehall departments. That might help them in the long run…

Author

  • Charlie Edwards

    Charlie Edwards is Director of National Security and Resilience Studies at the Royal United Services Institute. Prior to RUSI he was a Research Leader at the RAND Corporation focusing on Defence and Security where he conducted research and analysis on a broad range of subject areas including: the evaluation and implementation of counter-violent extremism programmes in Europe and Africa, UK cyber strategy, European emergency management, and the role of the internet in the process of radicalisation. He has undertaken fieldwork in Iraq, Somalia, and the wider Horn of Africa region.

    View all posts

More from Global Dashboard

Let’s make climate a culture war!

Let’s make climate a culture war!

If the politics of climate change end up polarised, is that so bad?  No – it’s disastrous. Or so I’ve long thought. Look at the US – where climate is even more polarised than abortion. Result: decades of flip flopping. Ambition under Clinton; reversal...