The annual planning round is a dreadful waste of staff effort and contributes to the problem of defence inflation. What other organisation with a capital outlay the size of the MoD's balances its budget each and every year? Bernard Gray wanted rid of it - no progress seen on that front yet. However I think the government itself will come to regret enforcing this silly rule.
It's often said there are no votes in defence. This has been true for the last 20 years or so, a situation aided by the fact that defence cuts happened only once every 5 years and generally soon after an election - so by the time of the next election, the last round of cuts was a distant memory.
When SDSR happened, it was sold by the politicians as the re-set that the broken defence budget needed - big bold decisions like axing the Harrier and Nimrod, etc etc. I am pretty sure the electorate thought that this would be the big round of cuts for the parliament. After PR11 I think there was a degree of public surprise that more big changes were announced - like the closure of Leuchars and the intent to draw the Army back from Germany, for example.
PR12 sounds like it will draw more adverse publicity. This drip-drip-drip of cuts caused by the annual planning rounds means that the most recent round will be fresh in the memory at election time - and so, finally, it might become an issue in a general election.
I don't think that would be a good thing for the forces though - we don't want to become a political football. It would be better for the Government and the forces if a 5-year budget could be agreed early in each parliament and the associated capability delivered against a stable funding background.
Last edited by Easy Street; 31st Mar 2012 at 21:23.