Defence: Public ignorance, the media, and cutbacks
The Boris Dividend?
According to today’s Times, Dominic Cummings is trying to get the Tories onto an election footing so they can ‘leave the EU then smash Corbyn’. As part of this drive Cummings is looking to departments for policy achievements and indications what policies can be ditched. The article goes on to suggest that ‘there could be significant cuts to wasteful Ministry of Defence procurement projects ...’
So is this Boris’ ‘Defence Dividend’ in the making? I know he made roughly the right sort of noises in the leadership campaign, albeit with seemingly less commitment than Hunt. In the meantime, I have been wondering how Defence in the round would fare given the announcements about spending increases for almost every other aspect of life. Now call me a bluff old traditionalist, but a global posture needs a credible military to back it up.
So is Defence about to get the bat inserted once again? Does Boris really give a damn about Defence?
So is this Boris’ ‘Defence Dividend’ in the making? I know he made roughly the right sort of noises in the leadership campaign, albeit with seemingly less commitment than Hunt. In the meantime, I have been wondering how Defence in the round would fare given the announcements about spending increases for almost every other aspect of life. Now call me a bluff old traditionalist, but a global posture needs a credible military to back it up.
So is Defence about to get the bat inserted once again? Does Boris really give a damn about Defence?
The one thing everyone agrees on , especially his friends and ex-employers, is that you can't trust Boris at all.
He'll do whatever is best for Boris at any particular moment.
It worries me to hear the words " wasteful Ministry of Defence procurement projects" - we know the UK MoD isn't exactly brilliant at procurement but what programs are currently underway that would make a difference financially?
Dreadnought - he'd face a melt -down from his supporters
F-35 - not when he wants to cozy up to Trump
Apache replacement - possible stretch I guess
Astute #7 - possible stretch
T-26 - surely not?
PoW - stretch - probable?
I'm scratching my head to see what else there is TBH
He'll do whatever is best for Boris at any particular moment.
It worries me to hear the words " wasteful Ministry of Defence procurement projects" - we know the UK MoD isn't exactly brilliant at procurement but what programs are currently underway that would make a difference financially?
Dreadnought - he'd face a melt -down from his supporters
F-35 - not when he wants to cozy up to Trump
Apache replacement - possible stretch I guess
Astute #7 - possible stretch
T-26 - surely not?
PoW - stretch - probable?
I'm scratching my head to see what else there is TBH
The quote “wasteful Ministry of Defence procurement projects” could have come from Dominic Cummings himself and as I pointed out on the carrier thread a few weeks ago he has long cited the carriers as a prime example. However, it’s tricky to see how large savings could be generated without selling at least one of them off, which would attract much criticism for undermining the ‘global Britain’ narrative. A way of doing it while minimising political damage to Boris would be to actively brief against the carriers’ usefulness. That’s just the sort of skulduggery that Cummings and co would indulge in, so it will be interesting to see how this develops.
Well he could just look at the Carrier thread on here where quite a few people (including me) bewail the distorting effect of the Carriers on the RN.
But as you say that is going to be a tough sell - maybe they 'll buy F35A's instead of B's to save some cash..................... but it's still hard to see one that will generate significant savings... and of course "savings" suggests that the money will come out of the Military Budget and be spent on bribes to those hit by BREXIT
But as you say that is going to be a tough sell - maybe they 'll buy F35A's instead of B's to save some cash..................... but it's still hard to see one that will generate significant savings... and of course "savings" suggests that the money will come out of the Military Budget and be spent on bribes to those hit by BREXIT
I have to say Cummings worries me. Just as I get a sense that McDonnell is the puppet master in Labour, I’m starting to wonder who is pulling the strings in Government. He would do well to remember he is an appointed functionary not the anointed Messiah.
But frankly I too am at a loss as to what might be cut, if nothing else given Boris’ apparent statements about ensuring the Forces are appropriately resourced and funded. All the major projects are well into their gestation with contracts signed and billions spent; like it or not they can’t simply be cancelled without cost. And if we really are going global, then we will need all those capabilities.
Not that facts or the reality of the situation seem to matter for much these days. An encouraging turn of phrase and invoking some Churchillian spirit seems to be all that’s required of our political leadership, the rest just have to repeat the approved lines. I’m not getting a good feeling about the next few years for Defence.
But frankly I too am at a loss as to what might be cut, if nothing else given Boris’ apparent statements about ensuring the Forces are appropriately resourced and funded. All the major projects are well into their gestation with contracts signed and billions spent; like it or not they can’t simply be cancelled without cost. And if we really are going global, then we will need all those capabilities.
Not that facts or the reality of the situation seem to matter for much these days. An encouraging turn of phrase and invoking some Churchillian spirit seems to be all that’s required of our political leadership, the rest just have to repeat the approved lines. I’m not getting a good feeling about the next few years for Defence.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
A56
Exactly what operational tasking you think the RN is unable to achieve because of the carriers? Use real examples....
Melchett
Agree. He strikes as a complete [censored]. Driven by convictions rather than provable facts, and not accountable in the same way as an MP or Peer. I thought we were leaving the EU as people were fed up of unelected power mongers?
Defence took a hammering from the Commons Committee for poor decision making - such as the SDSR 10 carrier debacle, committing to Helmand province without knowing who made that decision, or why, or what our forces were meant to achieve.
See: Decision making in defence policy
Poor record keeping, and making assumptions that people would have the same knowledge (eg the reason for preferring STOVL and F-35B was not adequately documented), and doing new things seemingly for the sake of it has not helped. The part of the Nimrod review that deals with organisational issues is also damning,
I fear that other Government departments suffer from the same malaise. Ministerial accountability and proper cabinet Government would help.
weemonkey
Not sure - some have promoted fishery protection as a growth industry.
Exactly what operational tasking you think the RN is unable to achieve because of the carriers? Use real examples....
Melchett
Agree. He strikes as a complete [censored]. Driven by convictions rather than provable facts, and not accountable in the same way as an MP or Peer. I thought we were leaving the EU as people were fed up of unelected power mongers?
Defence took a hammering from the Commons Committee for poor decision making - such as the SDSR 10 carrier debacle, committing to Helmand province without knowing who made that decision, or why, or what our forces were meant to achieve.
See: Decision making in defence policy
Poor record keeping, and making assumptions that people would have the same knowledge (eg the reason for preferring STOVL and F-35B was not adequately documented), and doing new things seemingly for the sake of it has not helped. The part of the Nimrod review that deals with organisational issues is also damning,
I fear that other Government departments suffer from the same malaise. Ministerial accountability and proper cabinet Government would help.
weemonkey
Not sure - some have promoted fishery protection as a growth industry.
The RN is short of destroyers, frigates, patrol vessels and submarines - that is a fact
they are also very short of men
the carriers have soaked up billions in cash and hundreds of men to man them
they will require a diversion of ships currently patrolling elsewhere to defend them
They look great but for British interests they are an overblown luxury that badly skews every other naval option
PS "not accountable in the same way as an MP or Peer."
- when were THEY ever accountable???
they are also very short of men
the carriers have soaked up billions in cash and hundreds of men to man them
they will require a diversion of ships currently patrolling elsewhere to defend them
They look great but for British interests they are an overblown luxury that badly skews every other naval option
PS "not accountable in the same way as an MP or Peer."
- when were THEY ever accountable???
It is highlighting as per the thread starter the public ignorance that is out there. RN has not got enough vessels to do another South Atlantic escapade like 1982, yet we are told that come Nov 1 there will be lots of vessels to protect UK fishing areas where in reality there will be no additional ones.
Even accounting for a couple of billion put into it, it would take 3 yrs to get even close to full protection and great you have the vessels but there is not the crew there and unlikely there would be either.
Icelandic Cod war would be a childrens Tea party in comparison because Spanish fishermen using 6-7 boats in a group enter Uk Fishing areas, this is done 15 times at same across a huge area and you have to try and police each one. Some will fish, some will just transit etc etc.
Come November the shock will be about how UK PLC cannot protect fishing areas, how it has happened, when it will be put right with the usual Right wing media asking can't we just send aircraft to sink these fishing vessels.
It is symtomatic of the malaise that RN will be blamed because UK Govt underfunds everything unless it is a mega capital project that sucks up billions as a bottomless pit.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OpEx or "run" funding is a different matter. Who cares about keeping the lights on, ensuring that carrier you just spent $X Bn on is fully manned, or if Typhoon pilots are achieving required currency? There's no prizes for this dull stuff, so just keep chop, chop, chopping until you eventually have to make the "hard decision" to retire due to obsolescence or some other such guff, bought about by years of chronic underfunding.
Other Government depts are no different, hundreds of millions can be found for new road schemes, but we refuse to maintain the ones we've got!
Exactly!!! But you rarely hear an SO writing to the "Times" about store levels TBH
Thread Starter
A56
So are you saying that because of the carriers, the RN has no ships committed to NATO, none in home water for Fleet Ready Escort, and none in the Middle East? How was HMS Kent rapidly generated and deployed in response to recent events?
racedo
When did this running out of 'bombs or missiles and blaming everybody' take place?
So are you saying that because of the carriers, the RN has no ships committed to NATO, none in home water for Fleet Ready Escort, and none in the Middle East? How was HMS Kent rapidly generated and deployed in response to recent events?
racedo
When did this running out of 'bombs or missiles and blaming everybody' take place?
It appears that while Britain has to reset its strategy and its commitments in a post Brexit world, there has not as yet been much serious discussion of the alternatives.
The country has a nuclear deterrent which will be expensive to renew and overseas alliances and territories that entail obligations.
A 'Little England' strategy focused on fisheries protection does not address those budget drivers. Are those up for discussion now?
Is there any sign of any coherent debate on future military priorities? At this point, can anyone discern where Labor and the Tories actually differ in their position?
So small wonder the public is indifferent and/or confused.
The country has a nuclear deterrent which will be expensive to renew and overseas alliances and territories that entail obligations.
A 'Little England' strategy focused on fisheries protection does not address those budget drivers. Are those up for discussion now?
Is there any sign of any coherent debate on future military priorities? At this point, can anyone discern where Labor and the Tories actually differ in their position?
So small wonder the public is indifferent and/or confused.
"So are you saying that because of the carriers, the RN has no ships committed to NATO, none in home water for Fleet Ready Escort, and none in the Middle East? How was HMS Kent rapidly generated and deployed in response to recent events?"
Would you care to say how many ships are committed to NATO, how many are Fleet Ready Escort and how many are in the ME? And how many occur in more than 1 category??
On July 22nd the total active RN destroyer frigate force available world-wide was 9 vessels - those of us who are unconvinced by the carrier argument believe the RN could have had a larger, and more useful, force of other warships.
You profoundly disagree - that's your privilege
As etudiant says there is a total lack of any sort of clear strategy - just a constant chipping away at numbers and continued stretch of the what remains
Would you care to say how many ships are committed to NATO, how many are Fleet Ready Escort and how many are in the ME? And how many occur in more than 1 category??
On July 22nd the total active RN destroyer frigate force available world-wide was 9 vessels - those of us who are unconvinced by the carrier argument believe the RN could have had a larger, and more useful, force of other warships.
You profoundly disagree - that's your privilege
As etudiant says there is a total lack of any sort of clear strategy - just a constant chipping away at numbers and continued stretch of the what remains
weemonkey,
WoW!!
WoW!!
Thread Starter
One of the underlying themes of this thread has been the question of whether defence and security planning should be based on known threats or known vulnerabilities. I hope that the unexpected good settlement marrks a move towards the latter.
I hope that there balance between efficiency and resilience is reconsidered by every Government department, public organisation, and major companies.
I hope that there balance between efficiency and resilience is reconsidered by every Government department, public organisation, and major companies.
Thread Starter
I once heard the phrase "less war - less peace" - very appropriate for these odd times.
From last December: New MI5 chief says UK facing 'nasty mix' of threats - BBC
Russian, Chinese and Iranian espionage and disruption is all growing in severity and complexity, said Mr McCallum.
The threats are to people, the economy, infrastructure, academic research and democracy.
MI5 has an operational role in investigating certain individuals and disrupting their activities, and a protective role building up UK's resilience in the cyber and physical spheres.
Dealing with China requires a complicated balance, he said.
He said there is a need to work with China on issues like climate change, but at the same time to be robust in confronting its covert activity.
New legislation is expected to make a big difference in bringing the law up to date in criminalising what foreign espionage agents get up to inside Britain.
Mr McCallum used a meteorological analogy, saying Russia was like bad weather but China was a far greater challenge in the long-term and more like climate change.
More recently: Into the Grey Zone - SkyCovert Attacks
All things we can expect from certain regimes.
From last December: New MI5 chief says UK facing 'nasty mix' of threats - BBC
Russian, Chinese and Iranian espionage and disruption is all growing in severity and complexity, said Mr McCallum.
The threats are to people, the economy, infrastructure, academic research and democracy.
MI5 has an operational role in investigating certain individuals and disrupting their activities, and a protective role building up UK's resilience in the cyber and physical spheres.
Dealing with China requires a complicated balance, he said.
He said there is a need to work with China on issues like climate change, but at the same time to be robust in confronting its covert activity.
New legislation is expected to make a big difference in bringing the law up to date in criminalising what foreign espionage agents get up to inside Britain.
Mr McCallum used a meteorological analogy, saying Russia was like bad weather but China was a far greater challenge in the long-term and more like climate change.
More recently: Into the Grey Zone - Sky
Covert Attacks
Proxy forces
Stealing vaccines
Crafted lies
Influencing voters
Supressing debate
Energy as power
All things we can expect from certain regimes.
Thread Starter
I wonder if these proxy forces being though about will include thing such as attacks on international shipping - such as these, or the use of anti ship missiles by proxies of Iran? These have required the deployment of frigates and destroyers. Likewise will interference with air transport by potentially hostile aircraft getting in the way be considered - with a need for protection by Typhoon etc?