I have a soft spot for Hutton. Any man in this Government who can make himself immensely unpopular with trade union leaders and champion nuclear power has something about him – even if in his last Industry job he ridiculously backed wind power.

But that is by the way. Hutton is now landed with defending the indefensible. Even though the working class sends its sons (and now daughters) by the thousand to fight for Britain, Labour's Left, unhappy in its British skin and inclined to appease, has always resented military spending. Its attitude is inevitably reflected over time in Labour Government budgets.

This parsimony passes largely unnoticed – give a briefing or two from the military – when an uneasy peace reigns. But when the bullets start flying, people begin to notice, if only because squaddies and their families, generals and, sadly, coroners, start to complain about our troops being let down by fat-cat politicians pontificating safely in Westminster.

It is at this point that I should try to bring balance to this column. Tommy Atkins is a born grumbler. It is probably what keeps him going.

The top brass are born lobbyists. In my experience over 24 years in the Civil Service, our generals, admirals and air marshals have an unrivalled ability to pursue their interests by carefully crafted leak.

I often complained that the MoD, along with the Foreign Office and the old Department of Trade and Industry, did not know the value of money. We must, therefore, keep things in perspective while recognising that there have been altogether too many credible complaints that the MoD is now stinting the Armed Forces.

In one sense, this is not surprising. Over the past 20 years, the Soviet threat has disappeared, though Mr Putin likes to keep us on our toes. Economising on defence became an easy option when horns had to be pulled in.

Then, when al-Qaida struck at the US in 2001, militant Islam became the global problem. For good reasons or ill, we have since been stretched in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Immediately, the cracks began to show. Failing the front line has been alleged consistently ever since.

But nothing is ever simple. Our Armed Forces – undoubtedly the best in the world – have probably never been better equipped technologically, assuming the technology is available when needed.

But what is clear from successive reports and inquests is that even the most rudimentary protection has not always been supplied – or readily available – whether body armour, vehicles or the right kind of helicopter.

This is partly because of the nature of the war that has had to be fought, first in Iraq and now, very dangerously, in Afghanistan. It is that most difficult of conflicts – total fanatical terrorism, employing suicide bombers, waged by "tribesmen" armed with modern weaponry against both the military "invader" and the indigenous people who
are judged to have collaborated with them

But surely, you may say, we had plenty of experience of that in Northern Ireland. Well, up to a point. But Northern Ireland is tiny, if more populous, than the vast dust of Helmand. Snatch Land Rovers may have been useful for repelling grenades in Londonderry but Afghan roadside bombs tend to wreck them.

These are serious issues for troops on the ground. So is the complaint that far more men are needed, given the size of the problem and the terrain. Undoubtedly, our so-called European allies should do their duty as members of Nato.

But this brings us to the question as to why we are there. Essentially, our men are in the front line in the war against Islamic terrorism. In Afghanistan, al-Qaida and the Taliban have been driven into their
rat holes in lawless mountains (though not confined to them) but, if they are to be defeated, hearts and minds have to be won and a nation rebuilt.

That inevitably brings charges of confused objectives between MoD, FCO and International Development – all of whom have a finger in the pie.

John Hutton has a lot of explaining to do – but mainly because of Labour's reputation for being unwilling to pay the insurance premium represented by properly supported troops.