The defence* review: does it matter to schools?

I have just finished reading Michael Lewis’s excellent history of the British navy from Saxon times up to the end of World War 2. The final chapter of the book caused me to think whether the announcement of a ’defence spending review’ earlier this week was actually an ‘armed forces spending review’ rather than a ‘defence review’, and that the two are not the same thing.

We are an island nation, even if we now have an umbilical cord to Europe under the narrow seas of the Dover Strait. Lewis made the point, even more valid today, that in WW2 we, as a nation, imported much of the food we eat, and a great deal of our energy, especially for transport and heating purposes. Indeed, we now import higher percentages of the latter than during WW2, because of the understandable phasing out of coal as an energy source.

The loss of oil tankers, sunk in significant numbers during the Battle of the Atlantic, and crewed by very brave sailors despite the terrible risks they faced, nearly had serious effects on the winning of the war by the allies.

Interestingly, Lewis also pointed out that our submarine attacks in the Mediterranean affected German supply lines to North Africa, and may have helped influence the outcome in that theatre of war.

 So, would a defence review take the logistics issue into account? In the short-term, is reopening North Sea gas and oil wells good for defence or are they too vulnerable to attack by drones flown by an enemy to be reliable in any future conflict?

Should we really be giving up on renewables now, as some on the right of British politics seem to think that we should, or is that being unpatriotic?

Use locally based renewables, such as solar and PV panels on rooves, and using them to power batteries for heating, air con or recharging vehicles saves on imported fuel, and reduces the task of our armed forces in protecting commerce generally, and especially the vulnerable tanker fleet. The recent war in the Middle East has made the power of fuel in a conflict abundantly clear.  

Is it now being a patriot to call for a move away from imported oil and gas, with a move to a mix of locally source renewable energy?

Regular readers will know that I have advocated the use of renewable in schools ever since the early days of this blog. I first advocated renewables way back in 2007 in a chapter I wrote in a book for the left of centre wing of the Liberal Democrats. 900th post: Solar or PV? | John Howson There is still much left to be done in respect of renewable energy and schools. I wonder if every school could have the challenge of ensuring at least one classroom linked to an air-to-air heat pump to provide aircon in heatwaves and extra heating in winter by September 2027? Energy policy for schools | John Howson

  • *Defense for those readers whose governments prefer Ministries of War rather than of Defenc[s]e

Oxfordshire and the defence dilemma

Defence* and education are both important public services in Oxfordshire. The county plays home to Brize Norton – the largest RAF base in Britain; RAF Benson; Dalton and Vauxhall Barracks, plus MOD Bicester, and for good measure a University OTC plus cadet forces that also include naval elements.

There is also Shrivenham, the national Defence Academy, plus elements of the reserve forces. So, a real presence from our armed forces, even if not as significant as in West Surrey, Hampshire and Wiltshire.

Apart from its schools and colleges, both state -funded and private, the county hosts two universities and lots of enterprises selling into the education market, including a thriving publishing sector.

As a result, of the county’s engagement with both sectors, today’s announcement of shortfall in defence funding may well have implications for the education sector across the county if the gap in funding defence spending is to be closed by raiding the budgets of other government departments.

The government already has a win with falling pupil numbers. This decline will release funding from education if the remaining pupils and students remain funded only at their present levels, even if inflation is taken into account.

However, there will be other implications for the education sector if the defence funding gap is to be closed, and possibly even more funding to be found for that sector, the announcement of new rules for CEOs pay in academy trusts Government plans NHS-style rules for academy CEO pay will be a shot across the bows of many MATs. I have written about this issue several times on this blog. See The pay of senior staff in academies | John Howson as an example.

I would go further and ask why there are so many MATs, each with a CEO. In Oxfordshire, the 2025 accounts for MATs operating schools in the county revealed a salary bill for the highest paid -excluding large national MATs with outrageous salary bills – of some £3.9mn for the highest paid employee of each Trust. Cut the number of trusts to say, 5, the equivalent of the former 5 divisional directors under local authority management of schools, and perhaps more than £1mn might be saved. Multiply that across England and the saving mounts up.

Then there is small sixth forms. I wrote about this issue earlier this year in a post Are small sixth forms a good idea? | John Howson This is a hard area to tackle, but with falling rolls is the current arrangements in a county such as Oxfordshire best for both the country’s finances and the outcomes for students, especially if we need more cash for our defence?

If sixth forms eat up cash, what about small schools? I favour keeping schools, and especially primary schools, in their communities. Oxfordshire has been excellent at supporting village schools, but could rationalisation save money or would the additional transport costs outweigh the savings?

However, the big transfer of cash from education to defence would be due to decisions on the pay of those working in the education sector and the funding of the sector as a whole that are taken at the national level.

Will funding return measures, such as Pupil Teacher Ratios, return to levels last seen 50 years ago when spending on defence was a higher proportion of GDP than today. What that might mean across England was laid out in my review of PTRS. (PDF) PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS BETWEEN 1974 AND 2024 AND TWO PERIODS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT RE-ORGANISATION PTRS OVER TIME: A REVIEW OF PUPIL TEACHER RATIOS

It is difficult to see anything other than challenging times ahead for education in Oxfordshire if the government is serious about more funding for defence.

 Of course, the government could just put up taxes.

*Defense for those with a Ministry of War

Defence Review sets growth target for Cadet Forces

The Defence Review published yesterday, and it was interesting to see that it has implications for education. Specifically, the Review includes some recommendations directly aimed at education and young people. The first of these is:

Work with the Department for Education to develop understanding of the Armed Forces among young people in schools.

I assume that will mean allowing recruiting teams into schools to offer career advice, and also, where an understanding of the role of the armed forces and home defence might fit into PSHE lessons.

More specifically, and with a cost attached to it, is the recommendation that:

Expand in-school and community-based Cadet Forces across the country by 30% by 2030, with an ambition to reach 250,000 in the longer term. There should be greater focus within the Cadets on developing STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) skills and exploring modern technology. Defence, wider Government, and partnerships with the private sector must provide appropriate leadership, support, and funding to deliver this expansion.

To reach this goal around 7% of the secondary school population need to be enrolled in cadet forces, or perhaps 10%, if you discount the youngest pupils in Years 7 and 8. If this happens then there is going to be a need for a whole lot of new staff in areas where the schools have been failing to meet recruitment targets for teaching staff for years.

What is the purpose behind this move. What will these young people be expected to do with the skills acquired after leaving school? Last year, at the start of the general election campaign there was a brief discussion about reintroducing conscription. As there is no mention of conscription in the review, might this be the alternative solution.  Although the voluntary scheme is much cheaper and less intrusive than conscription, it begs the question of who will sign up for the new places?

The last sentence in the recommendation suggests a new body might need to be set up to deliver the aims, especially if all the groups mentioned are to be brought together. Would such a new body be led by the MoD, and how will the new community groups recruit the staff for evening and weekend sessions when these days volunteer organisations are regularly struggling to find youth workers? Will local authorities be asked to help play a role in developing this expansion of uniform bodies.

As might be expected, there is a big emphasis in the Review on both the uses of and the protection from drones – the new weapon of war. The war in Ukraine has probably played a role similar to that of the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s in demonstrating how the technology of war can change in one theatre, delivery of the destruction of civilian population centres and other targets, while remaining the same on the ground: opposing armies slogging it out on front lines that resemble the trench system of World War 1.

I was part of the first generation to avoid conscription, and benefitting from that reduction in defence spending being used for improvements in the education sector from the 1960s onwards. It is sobering to remember that in the late 1940s there were something like 1,000,000 British forces personnel in Germany waiting for a war that thankfully never came. But, most of them were conscripts.

I fear now that defence of the realm will consume a much larger part of national resources, and that education as a sector may suffer as a consequence.  

Home Guard or Civil Defence Force?

A new home guard will be established to protect key British infrastructure from attacks by hostile states and terrorists , under plans reportedly put forward in a major defence review. The Independent Sunday 18 May 2025

Less than a year after the issue of whether or not conscription was under consideration by a Conservative government surfaced during the early days of the 2024 general election, we now have a Labour Prime Minister presiding over a defence review that apparently wants to revive a part-time volunteer army. Whatever happened to The Territorials and their companion volunteer reserve forces in the other armed services?

We will have to await the full Defence Review to understand what is in the minds of those charged with the defence of the ream in the 21st century. At a time when there are more teachers in training than the whole establishment of the Royal Navy, (a factoid that never ceases to amaze me), something clearly has to be done about staffing our defence forces.

With the armed services no doubt open to pressure to reduce their numbers of Commonwealth recruits, a group that don’t often receive a mention in the debate about immigration, a review is obviously necessary if we need more people in our defence forces. Incidentally, I saw a post on LinkedIn recently that suggested there were days when the recruiting offices across the whole of Scotland only managed to recruit one person a day into all arms of the forces.

Will the Review consider the issue of cadet forces for young people. The remnants of these units are now rather haphazardly spread across the country, although the private schools have still, at least in the boys’ school sector, managed to retain many of their Combined Cadet Forces.

The CCF also used to be a feature in the State secondary school sector, at least in selective schools, but largely disappeared in the early 1960s, around the time that conscription was abolished. I recall that the school I attended has such a Force in 1958, when I joined the school, but by the time I reached the possible age to join, it had been disbanded.

Will an expansion of such forces be part of the proposals, or will the needs be just for adult volunteers. And what about the Royal Observer Corps – will that again feature as a part of the volunteer defence force?

Personally, I think a civil defence force that has wider uses than just preparing for a war is a more attractive proposition to sell to the general public. Afterall, even if saboteurs were to play an important part in the scheme of things, we already have the Civil Nuclear Police force to guard our high-risk power stations – and, incidentally, they are the only police force where all officers are trained and can carry firearms on a regular basis.

A civil defence force could help in times of national emergencies, such as floods, fires and other times of high risk – where increasingly firefighters are already a mixture of full-time professional and part-time retained officers, such as those that tragically lost their lives last week at the Bicester Motion conflagration –.

You only have to think of the fire bombs of the animal extremists that were inserted into clothing in shops to know how recruiting soldiers to stamp around outside possible targets is little more than gesture defending.

I will wait with interest, to see what actually the government will be proposing.