Skip to main content

Web forum archive

The Royal Marines and the UK amphibious capability web forum

Defence Committee

Recent reports suggested that the Government is considering changes to the amphibious capability of the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines as part of the ongoing National Security Capability Review. The House of Commons Defence Committee invited members of the public to share their views on the potential impact of these changes.

The Defence Committee asked for public views on the following questions:

  • How important is the amphibious capability provided by the Royal Marines and Albion class ships to the UK?
  • What is the likely impact on unit morale and satisfaction with Service life if the reported changes and reductions are implemented?
  • What is the likely impact on the communities where these capabilities are based if the reported changes and reductions are implemented?

Deadline for submission to the web forum was Thursday 21 December 2017.

Return to the Royal Marines and the UK amphibious capability inquiry

954 Contributions (since 27 November 2017)
Closed for contributions

This web forum is displayed for archive purposes and is no longer accepting public contributions. For queries relating to the content of this web forum, please contact the Defence Committee.

Total results 954 (page 14 of 96)


04 December 2017 at 21:47

Seems that we are reducing our armed services to a level that the government can argue that we need to join Pesci and eu army. This is against the wishes of uk population who have voted against closer ties with eu and eu army. A country without its own army isn’t a sovereign nation. MPs need to do their duty to uk not eu.

Suzanne Bordley

04 December 2017 at 21:34

When I voted for this petition, I did so as I see this government and Committee members trying to overturn Brexit with specific questions. All British Military Personel and fleet are considered a necessity to the Uk and abroad, we should be recruiting and training our future generations, updating all military vehicles and fleet with the latest technology, our military budget should not be compromised by giving it to the EU, to do this woulud be tantamount to betrayal of our armed forces, we should not be even thinking about the EU Army, we should be reducing foreign aid to do so.

Anthony Robinson

04 December 2017 at 20:42

How important is the amphibious capability provided by the Royal Marines and Albion class ships to the UK? These ships and servicemen are extremely important to the UK's defense and overseas territories, The Marines and the Navy have shown that they need this type of vessel to get larger equipment and troops ashore which helicopters cannot always manage to do. This has been proved when giving humanitarian support abroad and especially during recent conflicts. We used to be the biggest sea power in the world now we have hardly any vessels left to meet our commitments with Nato and our overseas territories. We have just spent large amounts of taxpayers money £90 million on upgrading both Albion class ship and what for if they are sold off at rock-bottom prices. These ships must remain in the navy with the Marines for the UK's security and with us losing HMS Ocean which is going to be sold off would be a travesty. Instead of giving the European Union £90 billion we need to re-invest this back into the UK armed forces instead of our Brave Men and Women having equipment that is always breaking down endangering those brave people. With the lose of those Marines it would reduce moral throughout our armed forces as no one would know who is next.


04 December 2017 at 20:27

HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion are highly capable units and have a track record of proven capability in all differing spheres of Naval Operation. Both ships are capable of providing swift and reactive humanitarian relief throughout the globe. Both are capable of providing littoral manoeuvre in many areas around the globe. To lose such a capability would be to lose one of the great hallmarks of British Maritime Capability. In a world where Jeremy Corbyn recognises the requirement for LPDs yet the Conservatives seemingly (and ignorantly) seek to scrap them speaks volumes about the state of British Politics. To the wider morale of our servicemen and women, to scrap such capable platforms will tent an already tarnished morale within our Royal Navy/Royal Marines. What kind of message does this send to our people? Our brave men and women who serve this country? We, as a nation, have already broken that Military Covenant on a number of occasions, the Government and the Military themselves have broken the Personal Functional Standards that are set by the powers that be! What future messages do we wish to send to our service personnel? At this moment in time, morale and satisfaction with service life is at an all time low. And I am afraid to say that this constant barrage and abuse of those personnel needs to end; once and for all. Our forces are overstretched, under resourced and over-worked. If the Government wishes to cut further then it needs to recognise that commitments need to be cut. To abandon this concept and hope for our over stretched personnel to do the same with less is ludicrous at best, pure negligent at worse! Wake up! Wake up and realise that you cannot do more with less. Some call it greater efficiency, I call it negligence, plain and simple.

Jane Wonnacott

04 December 2017 at 20:00

If history has shown us anything it is that we, as an island nation, need a strong, flexible and adaptable fighting force. No-where is this more embodied than in our marvellous Royal Marines. They are the envy of the world due to their intensive training and self-sufficiency and feared throughout the world of any who would wish us harm. Their flexibility was shown once again recently helping those victims of terrible natural disasters – who was there first?.. Of course HM Royal Marines! These fine men need our support and we should be demanding that their strength be INCREASED not decreased. We, as a nation, need them focused on the job in hand not wondering if they’ll have a job tomorrow. An amphibious force need amphibious landing ability- properly maintained and at readiness to keep this precious island of ours safe. As someone once said “I don’t know the effect on the enemy- but they scare the hell out of me”! Long may it remain so.

stu wood

04 December 2017 at 19:36

after reading many of these comments ,i couldent agree more with the general flavour. if memory serves me right the army has shrunk from 156000 in 1982 to 78000 now . a similar fate has been forced on the royal air force and the navy.if the polititions wish to stand on the world stage and gesture, they need to understand this cant be done without credibility , this credibility comes from having strong armed forces in sufficient numbers.i feel as the marines are the preimier fighting force who can be called on with all their support ,which incudes the army and navy, they should be incresaed in size.getting rid of assets to save what is in the grand scheme of things peanuts ,could almost be seen as a wanton act of destruction. so please NO MORE CUTS. LETS START REBUILDING.

John Hussey

04 December 2017 at 19:09

The navy is under enormous strain in three directions, maintaining its nuclear fleet, maintaining a main battle fleet, and retaining an amphibious warfare component. The amphibious role has always been seen as 'messing about in boats' and not real seafaring, and yet repeatedly since 1945 we have found a need for amphibious operations when the other components have to been of use. WithIn NATO we have this almost unique capability, and it seems madness to give it up. If funding is the problem there seems a case to put the nuclear arm into a separate category, perhaps under some national formula and ring-fence that.

helen cartwright

04 December 2017 at 18:42

Are forces are our first line of defence to take that away leave us wide open. We should be putting more money in to them, the royal marines are very important to the safety of are country we are an island and their speciality is very important not only to use but to help other countries around the world. If we can find 50 million for the EU then we can fund all are forces as we should, not be cutting them.

Chris Roland

04 December 2017 at 18:31

If you peace, prepare for war. Our armed forces are already operating on the minimum. Do not cut our defence forces any further.

Christopher Carr

04 December 2017 at 18:16

Here is an alternative option. If we are struggling to cover the cost of the naval units in the very short term and this includes HMS Ocean aswell, why not transfer these units to the an emergency responce unit national and intentionally run via the aid budget. Also found this in the comments section on the ukdj website: The foreign aid budget will not be reduced – but that doesn’t mean the UK can’t be smarter in how it spends that money. 1. Transfer the bays and Argus immediately to a new DFID funded humanitarian force 2. Transfer the Puma force as well. 3. Sell DFID all surplus army equipment that is suitable for humanitarian purposes, such as land rovers, diggers, HGV’s etc. 4. Ensure the Foreign aid budget is spent only on humanitarian aid and only British manufactured (or surplus) goods can be provided. 5. Keep the Helicopter and naval force as back up for national emergencies and set into the NSS schedule a build programme for their replacements (which should always be second hand military – after their mid life maintenance is complete). 6. Use the money from the transfer of all these assets (sold at market value – not cheaply) to fund new equipment within the Forces. Inform the world that we are meeting the 0.7% GDP for foreign aid – whilst benefitting UK industry – it is up to us how we spend it and clearly we are rubbish at deciding that.

Total results 954 (page 14 of 96)