Tories Pinpoint 3 Projects for Cuts
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bury St. Edmunds
Age: 64
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is so depressing!
The really fightening thing is that, and here I may be wrong, but I believe that PPRuNERs represent a pretty wide, and well balanced cross section of our society. (I would say that as I'm including myself here!)
The views articulated here are generally from well-meaning, informed people whose expertise and views ought to be taken heed of by ANY government. Why is it that ALL our polititians appear to be such ignorant, ill informed ***kers especially they seem to find any excuse to jet off (at taxpayers' expense) to go on "fact-finding" missions to Afg, Iraq, FI or wherever takes their fancy.......
Maybe it is a middle age thing but I may be getting rather cynical but they all seem the SAME no matter what side of the House they sit on. They also seem to be able to totally dismiss the reported "displeasure" by Her Majesty the Queen as reported here on another thread.
The scary thing is that in an historic context spending c. 2.5 - 4.0 % of GDP on defence ought to both be considered prudent AND sustainable for a developed nation. One thing, as Bladdered alludes to above, is that History never can predict the next threat a nation might face with sufficient warning to do anything but address the threat with the "tools" i.e. weapons/platforms etc. already in the "cupboard". Even temporary reductions in spending will leave the "cupboard" totally bare as it's pretty empty already, with only old and broken toys, (C130's, Nimrods, Tristars, Pumas) left to play with.....
Effective Defence Policy is not about ignoring the threats and hoping for the best. Instead threats need to be assessed, both quantitivly and geographically, strategic and tactical considerations factored in and resources (both maerrial and financial) deployed accordingly. The alternative is we step down from the Security Council at the UN, we resign from NATO, downgrade the armed forces to coast-watch, internal unrest and ceremonial status only and declare ourselves Neutral!
Somehow I can't see any of our polititical masters being willing to up-staged by other countries' leaders, who (currently) they would prefer
call "minor states" although Cyclops seems to have a pretty thick skin following his recent "spat" with a certain Colonel in the wake of the al-Magrahi affair.
Once the UK's armed forces were truely great, never in sufficient numbers or with the best kit, the actual troops were always well-motivated (in spite of poor pay and conditions but with good leadership) and their "can-do" spirit legendary. Now all I can see happening is a mass Exodus, with the best people, as always, getting out first.
Someone, please tell me that I've got this wrong and actually things are not as bad as I paint them!
MB
The really fightening thing is that, and here I may be wrong, but I believe that PPRuNERs represent a pretty wide, and well balanced cross section of our society. (I would say that as I'm including myself here!)
The views articulated here are generally from well-meaning, informed people whose expertise and views ought to be taken heed of by ANY government. Why is it that ALL our polititians appear to be such ignorant, ill informed ***kers especially they seem to find any excuse to jet off (at taxpayers' expense) to go on "fact-finding" missions to Afg, Iraq, FI or wherever takes their fancy.......
Maybe it is a middle age thing but I may be getting rather cynical but they all seem the SAME no matter what side of the House they sit on. They also seem to be able to totally dismiss the reported "displeasure" by Her Majesty the Queen as reported here on another thread.
The scary thing is that in an historic context spending c. 2.5 - 4.0 % of GDP on defence ought to both be considered prudent AND sustainable for a developed nation. One thing, as Bladdered alludes to above, is that History never can predict the next threat a nation might face with sufficient warning to do anything but address the threat with the "tools" i.e. weapons/platforms etc. already in the "cupboard". Even temporary reductions in spending will leave the "cupboard" totally bare as it's pretty empty already, with only old and broken toys, (C130's, Nimrods, Tristars, Pumas) left to play with.....
Effective Defence Policy is not about ignoring the threats and hoping for the best. Instead threats need to be assessed, both quantitivly and geographically, strategic and tactical considerations factored in and resources (both maerrial and financial) deployed accordingly. The alternative is we step down from the Security Council at the UN, we resign from NATO, downgrade the armed forces to coast-watch, internal unrest and ceremonial status only and declare ourselves Neutral!
Somehow I can't see any of our polititical masters being willing to up-staged by other countries' leaders, who (currently) they would prefer
call "minor states" although Cyclops seems to have a pretty thick skin following his recent "spat" with a certain Colonel in the wake of the al-Magrahi affair.
Once the UK's armed forces were truely great, never in sufficient numbers or with the best kit, the actual troops were always well-motivated (in spite of poor pay and conditions but with good leadership) and their "can-do" spirit legendary. Now all I can see happening is a mass Exodus, with the best people, as always, getting out first.
Someone, please tell me that I've got this wrong and actually things are not as bad as I paint them!
MB
Last edited by Madbob; 16th Sep 2009 at 15:48.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The really fightening thing is that, and here I may be wrong, but I believe that PPRuNERs represent a pretty wide, and well balanced cross section of our society.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst most posters might be pro-military - I tend to think that most of us are cynics in relation to the reality of the Poli's versus the Military. After all, a cycnic is only an idealist with real world experience.
Being ground down by the high jinks of the ruling, sorry 'Political', class I am of the view that they should get only what they pay for.
No investment = no capability - however hard they try and spin it.
I do subscribe wholeheartedly to the concept that 'those who would lead must first serve'. There should be a qualifying period prior to standing for parliament - and that should not include being a staffer / flunky / intern felching from friends of the aged Ps.
Being ground down by the high jinks of the ruling, sorry 'Political', class I am of the view that they should get only what they pay for.
No investment = no capability - however hard they try and spin it.
I do subscribe wholeheartedly to the concept that 'those who would lead must first serve'. There should be a qualifying period prior to standing for parliament - and that should not include being a staffer / flunky / intern felching from friends of the aged Ps.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,816 Likes
on
1,200 Posts
I stand corrected and thank you for that, I was previously misinformed and have since checked
Scottish Office: Scotland's Parliament
Scottish Office: Scotland's Parliament
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cirrus, We might all be pro military but that does not mean we come from a wide variety of backgrounds etc. I would rather as much money as possible is spent on NHS, I will be in hospital on saturday for surgery, 4 days from diagnosis and 10 days from injury. This is what my taxes pay for and I was hugely impressed.
What I want (and I believe the country needs) is a force of well trained and equipped professionals who, though small in number punch well above their weight due to havings awesome skills, a good amount of decent kit and united leadership.
money that is spent on defence goes around, money that is wasted on benefits does not.
We all want good schools, clean hospitals, a gp you can ring up and see the same day and coppers on the streets to nick thieves and even firemen to cut us out of cars and put out fires.
IT IS TIME TO TAKE THE RUNNING OF THE IMPORTANT PARTS OF THIS COUNTRY OUT OF THE HANDS OF MEDDLING AMATEURS.
1. accept the fact the NHS does not make a profit, you put money and sick people in and get healthy and fiexed people out to go and earn more money.
2. cut the beauracracy down first, if any doctor spent more than half an hour a day doing notes or paperwork they are being wasted. If a techer has to write more than a paragraph a term on each child they are writing too much,
3. get away from this obsession with league tables, statistics are all lies and each auditor looks at each item differently.
4. Let the boss fire someone who is lazy and useless, that should be reason enough to dismiss them
5. pay someone what their efforts are worth, laziness will get no wages.
6. get the coppers on the streets.
7. have a bunch of lawyers go through the laws and tear up most of the last 12 years of labours balls.
Don't vote for me. I am too grumpy to be a politician, I'd offer world leaders outside.
What I want (and I believe the country needs) is a force of well trained and equipped professionals who, though small in number punch well above their weight due to havings awesome skills, a good amount of decent kit and united leadership.
money that is spent on defence goes around, money that is wasted on benefits does not.
We all want good schools, clean hospitals, a gp you can ring up and see the same day and coppers on the streets to nick thieves and even firemen to cut us out of cars and put out fires.
IT IS TIME TO TAKE THE RUNNING OF THE IMPORTANT PARTS OF THIS COUNTRY OUT OF THE HANDS OF MEDDLING AMATEURS.
1. accept the fact the NHS does not make a profit, you put money and sick people in and get healthy and fiexed people out to go and earn more money.
2. cut the beauracracy down first, if any doctor spent more than half an hour a day doing notes or paperwork they are being wasted. If a techer has to write more than a paragraph a term on each child they are writing too much,
3. get away from this obsession with league tables, statistics are all lies and each auditor looks at each item differently.
4. Let the boss fire someone who is lazy and useless, that should be reason enough to dismiss them
5. pay someone what their efforts are worth, laziness will get no wages.
6. get the coppers on the streets.
7. have a bunch of lawyers go through the laws and tear up most of the last 12 years of labours balls.
Don't vote for me. I am too grumpy to be a politician, I'd offer world leaders outside.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Cornish - rapidly going off-thread, but the problem with NuLabour is it can't differentiate between chucking money at a problem, and making sure that the problem gets solved.
My daughter's secondary school has has loads of money pumped in, but results have not improved. Finally the Head walked (early retirement) when an inspection showed this. Until then she spouted all the right NuSpeak buzzwords, but with no end result.
The same is largely true of the NHS, at which GB has tossed £billions. It was crap, and large bits of it are still crap. I know, as my wife and my mum are both very dependant on it, and they've had slack, sometimes incompetent service for years that is far too common, I understand.
If the MoD's procurement process is half as bad as some of my experiences with other government departments then it too needs to change.
Overall budget increases might be desirable, but if they don't deliver, then they and the baseline budget are being wasted to a greater or lesser extent.
My daughter's secondary school has has loads of money pumped in, but results have not improved. Finally the Head walked (early retirement) when an inspection showed this. Until then she spouted all the right NuSpeak buzzwords, but with no end result.
The same is largely true of the NHS, at which GB has tossed £billions. It was crap, and large bits of it are still crap. I know, as my wife and my mum are both very dependant on it, and they've had slack, sometimes incompetent service for years that is far too common, I understand.
If the MoD's procurement process is half as bad as some of my experiences with other government departments then it too needs to change.
Overall budget increases might be desirable, but if they don't deliver, then they and the baseline budget are being wasted to a greater or lesser extent.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The World
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bvcu,
Ref extra costs resulting from Treasury interference, there was a small article in the Torygraph a little while back saying that the ADDITIONAL cost of leasing the original batch of C17s then buying them was £500M. I recall that the one-eyed gimp insisted on the RAF taking this expensive route rather than the common-sense approach.
Ref extra costs resulting from Treasury interference, there was a small article in the Torygraph a little while back saying that the ADDITIONAL cost of leasing the original batch of C17s then buying them was £500M. I recall that the one-eyed gimp insisted on the RAF taking this expensive route rather than the common-sense approach.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Times moderator allowed my comment to be published. It was really just some simple maths in response to an earlier comment.
Anthony Times wrote:
Defence is very over-rated. Most of the time you don't need it.
How true!
Unfortunately, 'Most of the time' does not equal 'All of the time'.
When subtracting 'Most of the time' from 'All of the time', we are left with ‘Some of the time’.
During ‘Some of the time’, a functional and fit for purpose military is needed. Usually this happens at extremely short notice. To meet this ‘Some of the time’ requirement it is necessary to keep the military functional during 'Most of the time'.
When 'Most of the time' is added to ‘Some of the time’, we end up having to maintain our military for 'All of the time'.
Anthony Times wrote:
Defence is very over-rated. Most of the time you don't need it.
How true!
Unfortunately, 'Most of the time' does not equal 'All of the time'.
When subtracting 'Most of the time' from 'All of the time', we are left with ‘Some of the time’.
During ‘Some of the time’, a functional and fit for purpose military is needed. Usually this happens at extremely short notice. To meet this ‘Some of the time’ requirement it is necessary to keep the military functional during 'Most of the time'.
When 'Most of the time' is added to ‘Some of the time’, we end up having to maintain our military for 'All of the time'.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,816 Likes
on
1,200 Posts
Other changes for the environment would be any companies discharging into rivers would be required to carry this out up stream of their water source, therefore ensuring that what they discharge is clean.
The 99 plastic wheelie bins would go, the recycling bins, bin police, chipped bins would be reduced to naught.........
I cannot see any sense in blowing the budget to recyle plastics and packaging which makes up the majority of household waste..........
all that extra expense in an instance gone off our council taxes bills and the real culprits in this, the companies producing all this excess packaging in the first place would be fined if they did not reduce it, you do not need to recycle what has not been produced, recycling a paper box is pointless if due to a reduction in packaging that paper box is still a tree. It is better to save what you have, rather than produce something not needed and THEN try to recycle it.
God i'm sounding like a tree hugger, but how did we ever get to the point of wrapping our rubbish up in a plastic bin bag before we dump it?...... that has got to be the most idiotic and also most succesful brainwashing campaign ever...... want to throw some garden waste away?, allow me to sell you a plastic bag so you can throw that away with it too.......... I would also simply make carrier bags illegal.
The 99 plastic wheelie bins would go, the recycling bins, bin police, chipped bins would be reduced to naught.........
I cannot see any sense in blowing the budget to recyle plastics and packaging which makes up the majority of household waste..........
all that extra expense in an instance gone off our council taxes bills and the real culprits in this, the companies producing all this excess packaging in the first place would be fined if they did not reduce it, you do not need to recycle what has not been produced, recycling a paper box is pointless if due to a reduction in packaging that paper box is still a tree. It is better to save what you have, rather than produce something not needed and THEN try to recycle it.
God i'm sounding like a tree hugger, but how did we ever get to the point of wrapping our rubbish up in a plastic bin bag before we dump it?...... that has got to be the most idiotic and also most succesful brainwashing campaign ever...... want to throw some garden waste away?, allow me to sell you a plastic bag so you can throw that away with it too.......... I would also simply make carrier bags illegal.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wilts
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We can afford Defence spending and a lot more besides if the proposals put forward by James Tobin were adopted. The money this would raise would be eye watering and have the added advantages of stopping stock markets over heating and getting the people who helped to cause this mess to pay for it. I also find it odd how the Tories are not looking at PFIs which are doing so much to 'silt up' (I believe the phrase is) defence spending.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tobin tax wouldnt work. All the big firms would offshore, working from the UK but having accounts abroad. The internet is a wonderful thing in some ways, not good in others.
BEsides, we better get used to the idea that any money saved is going towards debt repayment for the past 10 years and not investment.
BEsides, we better get used to the idea that any money saved is going towards debt repayment for the past 10 years and not investment.
I have no great knowledge of economics, but I like to think I am a reasonably intelligent guy, and my understanding of the current UK financial situation (with it's consequent impact on the defence budget) is as follows:
UK is in debt to the tune of about £800bn at the moment.
The UK annual deficit is currently about £175bn per year.
The current government (Labour) state they will halve the deficit in 4 years. BUT THEY ARE REFERRING TO HALVING THE ANNUAL DEFICIT, i.e to about £90bn per year.....
So when, as a nation, are we actually going to pay back some of the debt? I realize that as well as paying interest we are probably paying some back every year, but we are borowing to do so, so the overall figure for UK national debt still keeps going up.
So, under current Labour plans, by 2013/14 we will owe about £1,300bn (over 100% of GDP) and only be borrowing £90bn a year more than we spend, surely an unsustainable situation, and why economic commentators say the burden of debt will be around for 30 or 40 years.
Against this background, can anyone take Labours talk of investment (I know Gordon has finally used the word "cut") seriously, and does anyone think the defence budget, like ALL others, will not suffer.
If I have got the wrong end of the stick feel free to say so, preferably in a polite manner please!
UK is in debt to the tune of about £800bn at the moment.
The UK annual deficit is currently about £175bn per year.
The current government (Labour) state they will halve the deficit in 4 years. BUT THEY ARE REFERRING TO HALVING THE ANNUAL DEFICIT, i.e to about £90bn per year.....
So when, as a nation, are we actually going to pay back some of the debt? I realize that as well as paying interest we are probably paying some back every year, but we are borowing to do so, so the overall figure for UK national debt still keeps going up.
So, under current Labour plans, by 2013/14 we will owe about £1,300bn (over 100% of GDP) and only be borrowing £90bn a year more than we spend, surely an unsustainable situation, and why economic commentators say the burden of debt will be around for 30 or 40 years.
Against this background, can anyone take Labours talk of investment (I know Gordon has finally used the word "cut") seriously, and does anyone think the defence budget, like ALL others, will not suffer.
If I have got the wrong end of the stick feel free to say so, preferably in a polite manner please!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think they are hoping for hyper inflation to wipe out the debt. Little problem is, the world is going to be deleveraging for a good 2-3 years yet, whilst the BOE is going to hit the QE buffers pretty soon with the bond investors.
Pretty much, we are well and truly F*cked.
Doesnt matter though, because all those daily mail readers will have houses worth three squillion pounds each.
Shame it didnt work out for Zim so well....
Biggus, we are only paying off interest only at present. The sad fact is, I bet some of the cash is being borrowed to pay off the interest. Nice.
Pretty much, we are well and truly F*cked.
Doesnt matter though, because all those daily mail readers will have houses worth three squillion pounds each.
Shame it didnt work out for Zim so well....
Biggus, we are only paying off interest only at present. The sad fact is, I bet some of the cash is being borrowed to pay off the interest. Nice.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will all possessors of big shoes, comedy flowers and spinning bow ties please report to 10 downing st, you have been recruited by "The Government" . Clowns might not be better but they would be funnier.
in 1997 a crack comedy unit escaped to the London Overground,
Today still wanted by the populace they survive by wasting Billions and stealing expenses,
If you have a probem, if no-one else can help, and if you can bribe them maybe you can hire...................
dakka dakka daaka
Gordy's Gang. (but if you aint rich then poke off,)
DOO DOO DOO DO DO DO, DOO DE DO DE DO DO DE DO
Etc.
in 1997 a crack comedy unit escaped to the London Overground,
Today still wanted by the populace they survive by wasting Billions and stealing expenses,
If you have a probem, if no-one else can help, and if you can bribe them maybe you can hire...................
dakka dakka daaka
Gordy's Gang. (but if you aint rich then poke off,)
DOO DOO DOO DO DO DO, DOO DE DO DE DO DO DE DO
Etc.
