At a briefing in Westminster for MPs with constituencies affected by the proposals, Prospect said the UK would continue to need three naval bases in order to fulfil its strategic interests and international obligations.MOD is considering ten options for the future of its naval bases at Faslane, Plymouth and Portsmouth. They include closing one, two or all three of the existing bases and building a new base, or using existing commercial facilities instead.But Prospect says UK task forces cannot be deployed from less than three bases because the logistic infrastructure required to supply and support vessels is spread across all three sites.On behalf of 12,000 specialists, the chair of the Prospect naval base campaign, Ernie Buckeridge said: "The department is not following its own operational requirements for engaging in conflicts. It is conducting a review based on accounting principles not on national and strategic interests. Nor has it made a proper analysis of the social, economic or environmental impact of their proposals."There are naval base efficiency savings which can be identified," said Buckeridge. "But they are not predicated on the closure of bases."

Buckeridge supported the remarks made by General Sir Mike Jackson, former Chief of the General Staff who criticised MOD for the way it runs the armed forces. "He criticised MOD for its obsession with bureaucratic process rather than achieving results," said Buckeridge. "Civilian support to the armed forces also needs to be valued, because without it the army cannot fight, the navy cannot sail and the air force cannot fly."

Buckeridge said that the union’s view was supported by the MOD base porting review conducted in 2002 which recommended that the three existing naval bases at Portsmouth, Plymouth (Devonport) and on the Clyde were required to provide the capacity to support ships and submarines in service, on order or planned.