I come from a world where we too get bonuses, and am therefore not too disenchanted with the basic concept.
However the bonuses are paid depending on how much revenue has been generated, on the quite reasonable principle that you only pay it out if you earned it/got it in, in the first place. Basc salary is fixed, but bonus depends on how much money you actually got in to the company. None of us here can see how this could apply to a Civil Service position.
Furthermore, if you tie it to wider performance, then fiascos like the Chinooks standing idle for most of their lifespan due to basic procurement blunders would mean no performance-related bonuses at all.
We feel it is also disingenuous to give a figure averaged across all staff, for there will be some significant higher officers, like those who presided over the whole Chinook thing, who will be receiving very substantial bonus amounts, apparently to "keep parity with the private sector" as I saw it justified today. Would this be the same private sector who can no longer afford final salary non-contributory pensions like the civil service get ? The same private sector who, with management of this calibre, would have them out on their ear in months ?
For the real troops, I understand there is an Afghan bonus. But what about those in the UK, or in the Navy who are currently uninvolved ? Do they get nothing but the Whitehall pen-pushers get rewarded ?