Actually I'd say it says nothing of substance whatsoever -
like pretty well everything that comes out from any level of government these days (and to be fair, in the past too) there is nothing of substance in that reply at all... at best it could be described as 'a bit aspirational'.
It was a difficult process (SDSR) where we needed to balance conflicting pressures - no indication of, for example, basing the decisions on defence on anything to actually do with defence.
Quite a lot on Moray - well, I live here and, in the ideal world I'd prefer substantial RAF presence here still as I have a lot of time and money invested locally... on a personal level I'd like to know that my property won't devalue to pauperise me as I approach retirement, as otherwise I might as well have partied rather more in preceding decades. The lack of MPA capability still bothers me, even if Kinloss had closed and St Mawgan was still on the go.
The decisions taken in the SDSR were fundamentally, and necessarily, about military capability,
Was there ever a bigger porkie told? At this point the lights are flashing red and the alarm is going 'whup whup'.
Ah, I can't be bothered - this reply is a sop, they haven't even had the decency to register that they are replying to someone who knows about defence, and who should therefore not be fobbed off with inconsequential verbiage. That really annoys me - when 'they' are replying to people who have some knowledge of the subject matter 'they' still give the same reply they'd give to Jordan.
Dave