there is no need to move around so schooling can be stable......therefore no need for a boarding school
And that is precisely the line being peddled by the Bean Counters - fewer bases, less need (or options) to move, no need for CEA. Not saying this is going to affect only the RAF - I would suggest the Army (with their Garrisons) and the Navy (with not many Dockyards left) will feel the pinch harder. Expect pressure to be put on whether an individual is mobile (in the permanent move sense rather than the deployable sense) or not. That's when the tears will come.
Of course if you made those in receipt of CEA compulsory redundant you've made a double savings.
And to counter the Daily Mail line you can expect the Mirror to come up with "if CEA is good enough for Servicemen who are not mobile then why aren't the Nurses / Firemen (insert any public servant) getting CEA as well" or worse "ConDem Education system not good enough for our brave lads and lasses" thus accelerating the removal of CEA to prove the state system is good enough, despite (as RA puts it) there not being enough money for :
new schools in a number of locations
and
attendant 'all up' costs of teachers
Does anybody know how much the removal of CEA would save? How many would actually leave the Service if it was removed? And those that would leave are they the ones who the Services would love to get rid of (i.e. the non-deployables/O2 thieves who only remain in the Services because of the CEA package). Any changes, which again I firmly believe are only going to be to the regulations rather than the total removal, will be lost in the noise of the big ticket item cuts (along with other changes to allowances, quartering charges etc etc).
There are far worse things to worry about than the future of CEA I would suggest!