If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks chances are it's a duck !! This is not a 'realignment' or an adjustment - it is a defence cut to save money.
If defence spending is rising in ‘real terms’ why are we being told to institute 2.5% year-on-year 'efficiency savings'? BTW, when next year comes around and we are at 97.5% won't the 2.5% of that figure be proportionately more and increase proportionally for the duration of the ‘efficiency’ drive.
I note that the treasury has ‘provided funding for the Iraq operation’. Really? - then why have we been told that flying hours in the Gulf are to be counted in the annual total as, quote, ‘the treasury has refused to accept this as a cost of the operation’ end quote.
Another point on basic maths: The total strength of the RAF is currently 48000 because we can't (or won't) recruit to our actual limit total of 52200. Based on that figure, the RAF will be cut by 11200 personnel not the oft quoted 8000.
Rant over, sadness descending
