Election Defence Debate

[ORAC]

DEFENCE DEBATE: Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith and Lib Dem defence spokeswoman Julie Smith are taking part in an election debate at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank, chaired by Times Defence Editor Lucy Fisher. From 12.30 p.m. Livestream here. (https://rusi.org/event/pre-election-defence-debate-0)

https://rusi.org/event/pre-election-defence-debate-0

[Finningley Boy]

I shall be on the look out for that. Hopefully this will amount to rather more detail than would ya wouldn't ya regarding Trident, would ya wouldn't ya allow the continued hounding of ex-soldiers over Historic Allegations and how much they're going to spend on better provision for those who have served the colours! The last point the Labour Party are trying to capitalize on. They will also implement another SDSR, I personally imagine that it is the upshot of that which will reveal the true disposition of a Labour Government on National Defence and Security.

FB

[charliegolf]

I shall be on the look out for that. Hopefully this will amount to rather more detail than would ya wouldn't ya regarding Trident, would ya wouldn't ya allow the continued hounding of ex-soldiers over Historic Allegations and how much they're going to spend on better provision for those who have served the colours! The last point the Labour Party are trying to capitalize on. They will also implement another SDSR, I personally imagine that it is the upshot of that which will reveal the true disposition of a Labour Government on National Defence and Security.

FB

FB, I have long been impressed by your optimism!:ok:

CG

[Finningley Boy]

Yes indeed CG, the prospect of a Labour Government, particularly on this issue, reminds me of that old story about the reviewing officer at Sandhurst, Cranwell etc, when giving his address to the new intake on passing out, reflects on the achievements of those on parade. Starting with those who have achieved distinction and working his way to mentioning those who managed to muddle through, just. But in order to give them heart and reassure, the good General/Air Chief Marshal/Admiral claims to have had such a scarcely satisfactory assessment himself when he graduated, and look at him now etc. He goes on to tell the foregathered that in fact the College Commandant was minded to write about him that, anyone who would follow this officer anywhere would do so, surely, out of mere curiosity!

Well CG, that is how I feel about a Corbyn Government, especially on the subject at hand, it would be very intriguing!

FB

[MFC_Fly]

Wow... so Security and defence is THE TOP PRIORITY for Labour :eek: So why have we not heard them say a thing about it in the campaigning?

[Finningley Boy]

MFC Fly,

I don't believe it is, personally I don't think its much of a priority for the Tories either, certainly not any of the wee parties. However, you can be sure as Christmas sales that as soon as any MP from a big party, like Labour, the effused support for a 'serious' Defence policy will be forthcoming.

FB

[Herod]

We all know that politicians are big on defence. They all like to sit on de fence.

[tucumseh]

The Labour lady spoke of NATO as if it were a place. The Lib Dem admitted she was a sub, as the proper guy couldn’t get there because it was too far and too difficult to travel. I’m not sure either mentioned anything of substance.

That meant three of the four hadn’t a scoobie, leaving Ben Wallace. He started off well, but then resorted to the propaganda that the likes of MRA4 (which was the subject of the question) was cancelled because of the deficit. And his memory of PFI origins left something to be desired. But otherwise he spoke very well of some detailed matters, which one would expect. I did like his rant about Tracer/FRES/Boxer. He doesn’t look old enough to remember Tracer, which was always a case study in how not to do it during MoD training in the 90s. But, overall, he wiped the floor with the others. What, a Minister knows his subject? Can’t have that.

[MFC_Fly]

MFC Fly,

I don't believe it is

Well in the debate the opening statement from Nia Griffith, the Shadow Defence Secretary, she clearly started out by saying... "For Labour, the security and defence of this country is of paramount importance, it's our top priority".

[Timelord]

I suspect that Ms Griffith meant what she said. The question is: does anyone else in the party hierarchy take any notice of her?

[Finningley Boy]

I've always thought that, she has sounded quite sincere the few times I've seen her holding forth on the matter, but as you say, Corbyn, McDonnell, Thornberry and Abbott might try and maintain a similar posture (might try to) but I doubt if they would come across at all sincere.

FB

[heights good]

We all know that politicians are big on defence. They all like to sit on de fence.

Personally, I feel all politicians, regardless of flavour are self serving, dishonest and corrupt who do nothing for the overwhelming majority of the population.

No matter who gets into power, they create more laws, tax us more, remove freedoms, waste colossal amounts of money on pet projects on a whim and further their own agendas.

I have yet to be proved wrong....

[teeteringhead]

As someone once said, the trouble with democracy is that whoever you vote for, the Government gets in!

[Bill Macgillivray]

Have seen nearly all of this before (several times!) and have no faith in any party any more! I just wish that there was a space on the voting paper for "None of the Above!" and that it would be counted along with all other votes. At least it might send a message to these self-serving *****'s !

Bill

[Haraka]

Bill. Writing something to that effect across the paper whist not filling out ( or filling in all the boxes) results in a "spoiled vote " which has to be registered and declared in the final tally. This is a traditional vehicle for expressing rejection of the "choices "offered .

Unfortunately although still paying U.K taxes ( on a long frozen national pension) and being a U.K. citizen I am deprived of this democratic right of representation having left the U.K. over 15 years ago ( and before this law was enacted).
Not a whinge , just a statement about a constitutional anomaly.

[BVRAAM]

Meanwhile on Planet Earth, we accept that Defence doesn't win elections, so they might as well have debated what the best breakfast menu is.

[Geordie_Expat]

Yet another thread that has turned out to be nothing to do with Military Aviation.

Come on guys, keep it for JB.

[BVRAAM]

Yet another thread that has turned out to be nothing to do with Military Aviation.

Come on guys, keep it for JB.

Defence in the 21st century heavily relies on aviation. From air defence, air interdiction, close air support, support/attack helicopters, air transport (tactical and strategic), missile defence and offence and a significant amount of the UK's intelligence gathering capability. All related to aviation. Aviation is a huge part of defence, so I would argue the thread is relevant because the debate in question is so broad. There's loads I've missed out - that's by no means a complete list!

[CISAtSea]

The spoiled ballot paper stats might be glanced at, but an empty seat in the House generated from a winning "None of the Above" vote would tell them more. I suspect the whole building would be well-nigh empty!

[Geordie_Expat]

BVRAAM: I'm fully aware of that but if you have been reading the recent posts you will see ref to global warming etc.

[BVRAAM]

BVRAAM: I'm fully aware of that but if you have been reading the recent posts you will see ref to global warming etc.

Climate change is becoming a defence issue as well. Currently (some) wars are fought over oil. The wars of the future will be over lithium and cobalt.

[just another jocky]

Meanwhile on Planet Earth....

You asked.

[ShotOne]

It’s astonishing that some here are taken in by Labour’s Christmas pantomime of being interested in defence. After a career spent pouring abuse and contempt for the armed forces and heaping praise on those who would murder them, suddenly Corbyn is the soldiers friend?? When he was accusing our armed forces in NI of atrocities and praising the “bombs and bullets of the IRA” he at least did so with genuine conviction. Now he’s just a two-faced low-life.

[Asturias56]

I think most people just believe that the other parties are no better - it wasn't Labour who brought in the 1956 Sandy's, were planning to auction off the carriers in 1981 cuts or the 2010 SDSR was it?

[heights good]

I think most people just believe that the other parties are no better - it wasn't Labour who brought in the 1956 Sandy's, were planning to auction off the carriers in 1981 cuts or the 2010 SDSR was it?

This argument is, on the face of it, compelling, but is flawed.

Although both sides blame each other, they are both to blame. VERY rarely do massive changes happen within a 4 yr cycle, most of the time when defence, economics and numerous other things happen over 10-25 yrs.

This means ALL sides are to blame in some way.

They are ALL as bad as each other.

They are all self-serving.

They all feather their own nests

They all keep (net) taxes high

They all remove liberties

They all waste money

They all blame the other shift

They all fundamentally make no real differences to the country

Just my opinion....

[Asturias56]

"They all keep (net) taxes high" - TBH taxes in the UK have fallen dramatically since 1979 - that's the problem - the spending on pensions, the NHS, schools stays high but the money isn't there so we see the gradual collapse of infrastructure and services

[pr00ne]

heights good,

You have spouted this nonsense before. It is a cheap list of cliched tired reductionism, last time you said "I cannot be proved wrong," now you say just your opinion...

Have you ever met an MP?

They do NOT all feather their own nests.

They are NOT all self serving.

They do NOT all keep (net) taxes high.

They do NOT all remove liberties.

And if they all fundamentally make no real difference to the country, what is your beef?

Whilst not being particularly enamoured of the current choice for PM, I have met and worked with a good number of MP's across the political spectrum. Almost without exception they came into politics NOT to feather their own nests but to make a difference, each according to their own particular political dogma. They could all make far more money elsewhere, they could all see far more of their families if they worked elsewhere, they could all do without the vitriol and abuse they suffer on social media and in the street if they worked elsewhere.

Your tired cliched view of politicians does you no favours, or have you swallowed a Daily Mail whole?

[Not_a_boffin]

"They all keep (net) taxes high" - TBH taxes in the UK have fallen dramatically since 1979 - that's the problem - the spending on pensions, the NHS, schools stays high but the money isn't there so we see the gradual collapse of infrastructure and services

Errrr, no. While the punitive rates of 80% plus on earnings above a certain level may have disappeared (and rightly so), the tax burden is about as high as it's ever been - and incidentally, the majority of income tax is supplied by something like 10% of the population.

When you talk about spending, spending (excluding defence) has generally risen above inflation. What it has not done is maintained ever increasing year on year real-term rises. So it's not that budgets are cut, it's that they don't rise in line with historical demand. The real issue is that demand for health and social care and pensions is essentially unconstrained - something than can never be met with realistic levels of taxation and also something that no polly will willingly admit, because it leads to a debate that the public in general won't like. ie If you want x, y, z services, you Joe Public (and not A.N Other aka "the rich") will have to pay for it. Or you constrain what is provided by the public purse - and that doesn't mean stop Johnny Foreigner from accessing those services, because that wouldn't dent the demand.

[Asturias56]

I think N_a_B the percentage of Public Expenditure spent by the Govt is much the same but individual taxes have gone down .

https://www.ukpublicrevenue.co.uk/uk_income_tax_analysis shows income taxes are pretty much at post 1945 lows

But you are right about the demand pull on services - no Govt seems capable of facing down the pensioners, the teachers and the NHS

[The...Bird]

Climate change is becoming a defence issue as well. Currently (some) wars are fought over oil. The wars of the future will be over lithium and cobalt.

What about water?

[heights good]

heights good,

You have spouted this nonsense before. It is a cheap list of cliched tired reductionism, last time you said "I cannot be proved wrong," now you say just your opinion...

Have you ever met an MP?

They do NOT all feather their own nests.

They are NOT all self serving.

They do NOT all keep (net) taxes high.

They do NOT all remove liberties.

And if they all fundamentally make no real difference to the country, what is your beef?

Whilst not being particularly enamoured of the current choice for PM, I have met and worked with a good number of MP's across the political spectrum. Almost without exception they came into politics NOT to feather their own nests but to make a difference, each according to their own particular political dogma. They could all make far more money elsewhere, they could all see far more of their families if they worked elsewhere, they could all do without the vitriol and abuse they suffer on social media and in the street if they worked elsewhere.

Your tired cliched view of politicians does you no favours, or have you swallowed a Daily Mail whole?

this is the joy of life, we can have different opinions.

to answer your question, yes I have met several politicians and this is exactly why I have the opinions I have.

I have met 3 Prime Ministers, 3 Defence Secretary's, 2 Chancellors, 2 Armed Forces Minister and numerous others over the past almost 2 decades. My uncle is also an SNP councilor and has been for 40 yrs. Every single one was insincere, avoided answering questions or in some cases were on the verge of complete incompetence. In the case of my uncle he is too lazy to get a real job but is paid well for doing very little. He has also talked himself into numerous positions which come with many perks and bonuses. He has no degree, no experience of the real world and has never worked a real job in his life.

whilst I am in violent agreement that most get into politics for noble reasons, politics is not a game that allows nobility to flourish. Politics is a dark underworld with rules that require making deals with the devil if you want to succeed. It is very much a case of adapt or die.

As for hard working, this does not mean efficiency of output or indeed, integrity. Many people work hard including criminals. Talking of which, how many politicians have criminal records or should have? Remember all those honest, hard-working politicians who spent time completing their expenses claims? Or the 11% pay rise when public servants were on a pay freeze? Or allow the financial corruption to flourish which led to the 2008 crash? Starting a war with Iraq by making up evidence? Resurrecting claims of murder against servicemen after almost 50 yrs despite a £200m public enquiry exonerating them? Equipping the armed forces with sub-standard equipment as it is British? This list is in no way exhaustive.

I do not have any political affiliation or read any newspapers.

If you don't agree then that is okay.

[Asturias56]

"He has also talked himself into numerous positions which come with many perks and bonuses. He has no degree, no experience of the real world and has never worked a real job in his life"

I can see why you are a bit bitter................

[heights good]

"He has also talked himself into numerous positions which come with many perks and bonuses. He has no degree, no experience of the real world and has never worked a real job in his life"

I can see why you are a bit bitter................

To be fair I have seen him maybe half a dozen times in my life.

He has not shaped my opinion anywhere near as much as the bigger 'real' politicians who have frankly, astounded me with their lack of any discernible talent other than waffling, believing their own words and avoiding saying anything of substance.

[BVRAAM]

I object to politicians entering politics without ever having worked a real job.

They are the politicians that, when elected, eventually end up in government and make policy that is out of touch most of the electorate. They know this, so in order to balance it out, they throw in "gimmes," that they know is attractive to the naive, they also know the country couldn't afford them, but hey, £250 billion in investment in a single area sounds amazing, when you know the square root of **** all about how economies work.

[Asturias56]

"I object to politicians entering politics without ever having worked a real job."

In the UK that used to be the case up to around 1985 - then the people who had jobs in Law or The City (Tories) or the Trade Unions or factories (Labour) were hounded out by people and the press complaining about "2 -jobs MP's", "Part timers taking our cash", "Unprofessional amateurs" etc etc and by the early 90's the route to government was with a Politics degree, time spent in a think tank, gophering for a Minister etc etc

So be careful what you wish for....................

[jindabyne]

Good Post 31, heights

I would briefly add the telling of untruths, of which Nicola Sturgeon is expert.

[heights good]

Good Post 31, heights

I would briefly add the telling of untruths, of which Nicola Sturgeon is expert.

Please don't get me started on the delusional SNP, they are so toxic and live in a complete fantasy land filled with tartan, Irn-bru, overflowing oil wells and Braveheart quotes.

[BVRAAM]

"I object to politicians entering politics without ever having worked a real job."

In the UK that used to be the case up to around 1985 - then the people who had jobs in Law or The City (Tories) or the Trade Unions or factories (Labour) were hounded out by people and the press complaining about "2 -jobs MP's", "Part timers taking our cash", "Unprofessional amateurs" etc etc and by the early 90's the route to government was with a Politics degree, time spent in a think tank, gophering for a Minister etc etc

So be careful what you wish for....................

I just wish for politicians to be in touch.

We also need far more veterans in Parliament. I love the work Johnny Mercer is doing. I also fully support Ben Goodwin's endeavours, even though I disagree with him on almost everything. We need more veterans on those benches.

[NutLoose]

Please don't get me started on the delusional SNP, they are so toxic and live in a complete fantasy land filled with tartan, Irn-bru, overflowing oil wells and Braveheart quotes.




Agreed, they are one trick ponies and seem to focus on the one subject to the detriment of running their Country whilst having a pop at the UK accusing them of doing similar over Brexit. They also bleat on about independence but wish to remain in the EU... then appear delusional as to what the actual the results of independence will mean border wise etc to Scotland, but to be fair the UK is in a similar boat.

i then still cannot get over Corbyn going on about pumping extra billions into Scotland to improve the economy, industry, infrastructure etc, then giving them a vote to leave afterwards... That reminds me of the RAF building swimming pools resurfacing roads etc then shutting the place.