Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
Biggus,
There is no irony, just further repeated examples that politicians and senior officers in the UK do not do 'strategic' joined up thinking. Instead they lurch from crisis to crisis, categorically stating this will be the last round of redundancies (how many times have they said that since 1991?) before finding themselves caught short by a situation that changes quicker than their ability to either appreciate it or respond to it in anything other than a knee jerk reaction because of the lack of options available due to the last round of cuts, thus prompting a further review and period of navel gazing.
Of course, this isn't a new phenomena, so the current incumbents of Whitehall and the various Ivory Towers shouldn't feel too bad - it's a systemic thing, perpetuated by the notion of promoting similar sorts of people who won't rock the boat. As far as I'm aware, it was recognised as far back as 1979, albeit with regard to why the Government's industrial strategy was utter hoop, and published by the Hansard Society as a paper called Politics and Industry the Great Mismatch, the basic premise being that the decision makers only ever looked as far as the next election rather than taking the long term strategic decisions industry required to be effective in the medium - long term.
So yes, you are probably correct and the writing is more than likely on the wall for many who have just signed or are going to be signed on until 60. Although we could beat them to it in the rush to quit - I have heard of 3 colleagues in the past 2 days who have either PVR'd or given notice of intention to take their option. I don't think its tinnitus causing ringing in the ears down at Air Comd these days.
There is no irony, just further repeated examples that politicians and senior officers in the UK do not do 'strategic' joined up thinking. Instead they lurch from crisis to crisis, categorically stating this will be the last round of redundancies (how many times have they said that since 1991?) before finding themselves caught short by a situation that changes quicker than their ability to either appreciate it or respond to it in anything other than a knee jerk reaction because of the lack of options available due to the last round of cuts, thus prompting a further review and period of navel gazing.
Of course, this isn't a new phenomena, so the current incumbents of Whitehall and the various Ivory Towers shouldn't feel too bad - it's a systemic thing, perpetuated by the notion of promoting similar sorts of people who won't rock the boat. As far as I'm aware, it was recognised as far back as 1979, albeit with regard to why the Government's industrial strategy was utter hoop, and published by the Hansard Society as a paper called Politics and Industry the Great Mismatch, the basic premise being that the decision makers only ever looked as far as the next election rather than taking the long term strategic decisions industry required to be effective in the medium - long term.
So yes, you are probably correct and the writing is more than likely on the wall for many who have just signed or are going to be signed on until 60. Although we could beat them to it in the rush to quit - I have heard of 3 colleagues in the past 2 days who have either PVR'd or given notice of intention to take their option. I don't think its tinnitus causing ringing in the ears down at Air Comd these days.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Middle England
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
......and with regard to redundancy what makes you think reductions in manpower will be accomplished by a formal funded redundancy programme. Hidden away in the NEM sphere are new 'manning levers' that will allow the individual services to dispense with individuals without the need to clear it through the minister and without paying out vast wadges of cash. In addition, the redundancy policy is also being rewritten to drastically reduce any redundancy payout to almost statutory levels if larger numbers are removed. 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To clarify and amplify my point above...the layers of government immediately under parliament will provide such stability as they can in times of political instability and as SDSR 2015 seems "pre-programmed" I think it will likely go ahead...unless chaos really does reign, which thus far in the UK is unusual in peacetime.
As to the meaningful content of SDSR 2015 or any other item of the governments agenda...well that is where the uncertainty and horn-swaggling will come in, so expecting legislation during a period of political instability to be "good legislation" is too much to expect IMO.
Confused...so am I
Fingers crossed Millibrand continues to arse it up...and somehow gifts the tories a majority.
PS not that I care for then any more than any one else, but I do like a quiet life.
PPS I live in Scotland - I'm pretty much **** ed whatever happens.
As to the meaningful content of SDSR 2015 or any other item of the governments agenda...well that is where the uncertainty and horn-swaggling will come in, so expecting legislation during a period of political instability to be "good legislation" is too much to expect IMO.
Confused...so am I
Fingers crossed Millibrand continues to arse it up...and somehow gifts the tories a majority.
PS not that I care for then any more than any one else, but I do like a quiet life.
PPS I live in Scotland - I'm pretty much **** ed whatever happens.
Thread Starter
Apparently MOD decision making may be less than optimal. Quelle Surprise!
Decision-making in Defence Policy - UK Parliament
Published just as the Commons goes into Recess. The SDSR decision making process was very flawed last time. I hope it less based on twenty minute meetings this time!
Meanwhile, to go back a few pages:
Try entering ISIL into the search function on the RN website. We do need a T23 or T45 to do that.
Will the utility of carriers (and other ships carrying helicopters - such as HMS Ocean during the Libyan campaign) in recent and ongoing operations influence SDSR decision making? Or perhaps the role played by Merlins based aboard RFA Argus off the cost Sierra Leone over the last few months? Will current goings on in Yemen (a littoral state) remind the politicians off the need for maritime capabilities?
Will Russian Bear activity and the need to borrow Maritime Patrol Aircraft from other nations to get the deterrent safely to deep water make the politicians think?
Decision-making in Defence Policy - UK Parliament
Published just as the Commons goes into Recess. The SDSR decision making process was very flawed last time. I hope it less based on twenty minute meetings this time!
Meanwhile, to go back a few pages:
Originally Posted by HH
TBH we don't need a 23 or a 45 to chase pirates - any ship that can carry an armed helicopter and a couple of dozen marines will do nicely
Will the utility of carriers (and other ships carrying helicopters - such as HMS Ocean during the Libyan campaign) in recent and ongoing operations influence SDSR decision making? Or perhaps the role played by Merlins based aboard RFA Argus off the cost Sierra Leone over the last few months? Will current goings on in Yemen (a littoral state) remind the politicians off the need for maritime capabilities?
Will Russian Bear activity and the need to borrow Maritime Patrol Aircraft from other nations to get the deterrent safely to deep water make the politicians think?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Or. 
It probably depends when you ask the question, WEBF. Talking UK public. Right now there's nothing much in the news apart from ISIS and very occasional reports from around the world, which have slipped down the page somewhat. Syria et al are old news so the UK public tuts at the reports, but not much else. There are no bodies coming back from conflict zones. Your average Jo Public doesn't feel like the UK is involved in much so it's not in the public eye.
I expect the Government is very happy with that situation as it is likely to minimise outcry when they need to make more cuts in SDSR and the Budget Announcement in July(?). I expect the VSOs in the MoD are feeling a bit exposed by the lack of good headlines.
It will take more than sending rescue/logistics assets to Nepal or winching a Korean sailor off a fishing boat to shift the public gaze back to the military. A fickle lot, aren't they?
Ask a voter what they think of things in the UK Armed Forces today and the first things that come to their heads will, most likely, be bad news like AB McN.
A couple of years ago it would have been very different. Five years ago even more so.
I expect the Government is very happy with that situation as it is likely to minimise outcry when they need to make more cuts in SDSR and the Budget Announcement in July(?). I expect the VSOs in the MoD are feeling a bit exposed by the lack of good headlines.
It will take more than sending rescue/logistics assets to Nepal or winching a Korean sailor off a fishing boat to shift the public gaze back to the military. A fickle lot, aren't they?
Ask a voter what they think of things in the UK Armed Forces today and the first things that come to their heads will, most likely, be bad news like AB McN.
A couple of years ago it would have been very different. Five years ago even more so.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,372
Received 117 Likes
on
84 Posts
" It will take more than sending rescue/logistics assets to Nepal or winching a Korean sailor off a fishing boat to shift the public gaze back to the military. A fickle lot, aren't they?
Ask a voter what they think of things in the UK Armed Forces today and the first things that come to their heads will, most likely, be bad news like AB McN.
A couple of years ago it would have been very different. Five years ago even more so
CM..
The public perception of the military is, to a great extent, influenced by the military themselves.
For most of the public, Defence is a low priority in terms of interest. Why should it be, when, in effect, the military are no longer getting the prominence in the media that conflict, any conflict over the years, generates.
With the various reductions over the years, unless you happen to live within the proximity of an established military area, all Services, the public are unlikely to encounter military personnel on a regular basis. That, and when the PIRA were active on the UK mainland military personnel were banned from travelling in uniform, then in effect, they faded from the public gaze.
Most people now simply associate the military with ceremonial / commemorative events / The Red Arrows / the former yellow SAR force and that's only for the RAF element.
That, and the military really do need to engage in some serious introspection when it comes to the public. The example I witnessed of the Shrivenham so called "elite" was the most appalling piece of PR possible. Imagine the perception of the public, when confronted with say 80+ 2.5 / 3 rings officers and their arrogance in the hotel. That image will last a long time in people's memories.
Equally, whilst you now see personnel in uniform and certainly at motorway services, whilst they may be polite, en masse they are quite intimidating and many seem unable to grasp they are in a public area, not on a base. I have witnessed on innumerable occasions, the public moving away from outlets until the military have left or been served.
Why, therefore, should they be interested in Defence. Why should anybody who is compelled to use a food bank to survive, or who has had their benefits cut to the bone, and please, whilst there are those who abuse the system, the majority do not, have even the remotest interest in the acquisition of the next "must have" wonder kit?.
Likewise the millions who are simply working to exist.
The fact is, for the public whom you describe as being fickle, the salient fact is that the military are but one aspect of life in the UK as a whole, nothing more, and for many, they very low on their list of daily interests and priorities.
Ask a voter what they think of things in the UK Armed Forces today and the first things that come to their heads will, most likely, be bad news like AB McN.
A couple of years ago it would have been very different. Five years ago even more so
CM..
The public perception of the military is, to a great extent, influenced by the military themselves.
For most of the public, Defence is a low priority in terms of interest. Why should it be, when, in effect, the military are no longer getting the prominence in the media that conflict, any conflict over the years, generates.
With the various reductions over the years, unless you happen to live within the proximity of an established military area, all Services, the public are unlikely to encounter military personnel on a regular basis. That, and when the PIRA were active on the UK mainland military personnel were banned from travelling in uniform, then in effect, they faded from the public gaze.
Most people now simply associate the military with ceremonial / commemorative events / The Red Arrows / the former yellow SAR force and that's only for the RAF element.
That, and the military really do need to engage in some serious introspection when it comes to the public. The example I witnessed of the Shrivenham so called "elite" was the most appalling piece of PR possible. Imagine the perception of the public, when confronted with say 80+ 2.5 / 3 rings officers and their arrogance in the hotel. That image will last a long time in people's memories.
Equally, whilst you now see personnel in uniform and certainly at motorway services, whilst they may be polite, en masse they are quite intimidating and many seem unable to grasp they are in a public area, not on a base. I have witnessed on innumerable occasions, the public moving away from outlets until the military have left or been served.
Why, therefore, should they be interested in Defence. Why should anybody who is compelled to use a food bank to survive, or who has had their benefits cut to the bone, and please, whilst there are those who abuse the system, the majority do not, have even the remotest interest in the acquisition of the next "must have" wonder kit?.
Likewise the millions who are simply working to exist.
The fact is, for the public whom you describe as being fickle, the salient fact is that the military are but one aspect of life in the UK as a whole, nothing more, and for many, they very low on their list of daily interests and priorities.
I agree with everything you say, Krystal. And it is that lack of public interest that means the Chancellor can tighten the purse strings even more without fear of significant public indignation. They can pretty much sweep the Commons Defence Committee report under the carpet in the expectation of a few days of small, non-front-page articles and nothing more.
There is no appetite for military involvement or "boots on the ground" in overseas conflicts and the public imagination is far more likely to be captured by other headline issues like the EU, SNP behaviour in Parliament, benefits, NHS, schools and traffic cameras.
Sad, but hardly surprising.
There is no appetite for military involvement or "boots on the ground" in overseas conflicts and the public imagination is far more likely to be captured by other headline issues like the EU, SNP behaviour in Parliament, benefits, NHS, schools and traffic cameras.
Sad, but hardly surprising.
Thread Starter
Apparently MOD decision making may be less than optimal. Quelle Surprise!
Decision-making in Defence Policy - UK Parliament
Published just as the Commons goes into Recess. The SDSR decision making process was very flawed last time. I hope it less based on twenty minute meetings this time!
Meanwhile, to go back a few pages:
Try entering ISIL into the search function on the RN website. We do need a T23 or T45 to do that.
Will the utility of carriers (and other ships carrying helicopters - such as HMS Ocean during the Libyan campaign) in recent and ongoing operations influence SDSR decision making? Or perhaps the role played by Merlins based aboard RFA Argus off the cost Sierra Leone over the last few months? Will current goings on in Yemen (a littoral state) remind the politicians off the need for maritime capabilities?
Will Russian Bear activity and the need to borrow Maritime Patrol Aircraft from other nations to get the deterrent safely to deep water make the politicians think?
Decision-making in Defence Policy - UK Parliament
Published just as the Commons goes into Recess. The SDSR decision making process was very flawed last time. I hope it less based on twenty minute meetings this time!
Meanwhile, to go back a few pages:
Try entering ISIL into the search function on the RN website. We do need a T23 or T45 to do that.
Will the utility of carriers (and other ships carrying helicopters - such as HMS Ocean during the Libyan campaign) in recent and ongoing operations influence SDSR decision making? Or perhaps the role played by Merlins based aboard RFA Argus off the cost Sierra Leone over the last few months? Will current goings on in Yemen (a littoral state) remind the politicians off the need for maritime capabilities?
Will Russian Bear activity and the need to borrow Maritime Patrol Aircraft from other nations to get the deterrent safely to deep water make the politicians think?
In the last few months - the Royal Navy has taken control of CTF 50 in the Middle East, from HMS Ocean.
RAF Typhoons have been commited to additional air policing tasks.
RN warships have been protecting shipping from anti ship missile threats.