Party Manifestos - Conservatives on Defence
Thread Starter
Party Manifestos - Conservatives on Defence
Hot off the Press - the Conservative's statement on Defence:
Defence
The soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, civilians and their families that make up our Armed Forces are the backbone of this nation’s security. But more than a decade of neglect by Labour has left them overstretched, undermanned, and with key equipment arriving late.
A Conservative government will, most importantly, repair the broken Military Covenant, respect our Armed Forces, and ensure that Forces’ families and veterans are taken care of. We will double the operational bonus for troops serving in Afghanistan. And we will pilot a follow-up telephone service that will track and monitor veterans’ mental health after they leave the Armed Forces, so that those who are deemed at risk can be referred for treatment.
Our Military Covenant Commission has recommended better ways of taking care of service members and their families. The Commission's report will provide the basis for our Armed Forces manifesto which will establish a strong relationship between the Armed Forces and the next Conservative government.
A Conservative government will match defence resources with commitments by launching a Strategic Defence Review and introducing a US-style system of regular defence reviews. We will also conduct a capabilities review to maximise efficiency in the Ministry of Defence.
Future defence procurement projects will be determined on five criteria:
We will ensure that NATO, not the EU, remains the cornerstone of our nation’s defence. And we are committed to replacing Trident and maintaining the UK's independent nuclear deterrent.
Hmm. If the Conservatives forms a majority government, what then?
Defence
The soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, civilians and their families that make up our Armed Forces are the backbone of this nation’s security. But more than a decade of neglect by Labour has left them overstretched, undermanned, and with key equipment arriving late.
A Conservative government will, most importantly, repair the broken Military Covenant, respect our Armed Forces, and ensure that Forces’ families and veterans are taken care of. We will double the operational bonus for troops serving in Afghanistan. And we will pilot a follow-up telephone service that will track and monitor veterans’ mental health after they leave the Armed Forces, so that those who are deemed at risk can be referred for treatment.
Our Military Covenant Commission has recommended better ways of taking care of service members and their families. The Commission's report will provide the basis for our Armed Forces manifesto which will establish a strong relationship between the Armed Forces and the next Conservative government.
A Conservative government will match defence resources with commitments by launching a Strategic Defence Review and introducing a US-style system of regular defence reviews. We will also conduct a capabilities review to maximise efficiency in the Ministry of Defence.
Future defence procurement projects will be determined on five criteria:
- Capability
- Interoperability
- Adaptability
- Affordability
- Exportability
We will ensure that NATO, not the EU, remains the cornerstone of our nation’s defence. And we are committed to replacing Trident and maintaining the UK's independent nuclear deterrent.
Hmm. If the Conservatives forms a majority government, what then?
- The QEC meet all the criteria, especially the exportability bit. India? Interested?
- EU - slap in the face. Does the UK withdraw personnel and resources committed to EU missions?
- Quadriennial Reviews? Decisional statis for the last two years preceeding a review?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All well and good, but some of us still have memories of Bunter Soames and Options, not to mention the loss of the hospitals at Ely, Halton, etc.
The tories are not immune to short-sightedness. To be honest, I would feel a lot better about a manifesto that said that they were going to shake Main Building warmly by the throat. This is a start, but no different to New Labia. Smacks of platitudes, I'm afraid.
Cant really be any worse than New Labia, but hardly the dawning of a new age...
The tories are not immune to short-sightedness. To be honest, I would feel a lot better about a manifesto that said that they were going to shake Main Building warmly by the throat. This is a start, but no different to New Labia. Smacks of platitudes, I'm afraid.
Cant really be any worse than New Labia, but hardly the dawning of a new age...
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: shrewsbury
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- The QEC meet all the criteria, especially the exportability bit. India? Interested?
- EU - slap in the face. Does the UK withdraw personnel and resources committed to EU missions?
- Quadriennial Reviews? Decisional statis for the last two years preceeding a review?
Yes.
Could you translate this for me please?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We will streamline the procurement process to ensure the speedy delivery of equipment to the front line.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK can someone remind me how much it's costing to participate in the nonsense that is Afghanistan. Whilst you guys almost certainly deserve the increase in operational bonus, if we were not there that money also would be "saved".
I like the bit about dumping EU as a cornerstone of defence, and a restoration of the Military Covenant, but somehow I'm not covinced.
Mind you, anything will be better than the present incumbents.
I like the bit about dumping EU as a cornerstone of defence, and a restoration of the Military Covenant, but somehow I'm not covinced.
Mind you, anything will be better than the present incumbents.
Thread Starter
Dakkg:-
- QEC - Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers
- Currently the UK has committeed (double hatted) battle groups to EU missions - as well as a few personnel.
- Quadriennial Reviews - the US have these defence reviews every 4 years; the concern is that enormous effort is put into theprocess, rather than the decision, and that decisions ar eheld off pending the next QDR
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: shrewsbury
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many Thanks.
So what the Tories are saying is pretty well the same as Labour.
The military is to continue getting shafted to support corrupt bankers bonuses, an overloaded NHS and education system caused by a dangerous immigration policy, and the £1billion credit card bill run up by senior civil servants food and wine intake.
As for DCs promise to give power back to the people, he'll have to retrieve it off Brussels first!
So what the Tories are saying is pretty well the same as Labour.
The military is to continue getting shafted to support corrupt bankers bonuses, an overloaded NHS and education system caused by a dangerous immigration policy, and the £1billion credit card bill run up by senior civil servants food and wine intake.
As for DCs promise to give power back to the people, he'll have to retrieve it off Brussels first!
Problem folks is, that the Military are almost a nuisance to all political parties come election time, they are mentioned in the manifestos rather as an after thought. Two of the best Defence Secretaries the UK has had over the years were both from Labour, Merlyn Rees & Roy Mason. I wonder, purely as a matter of interest, what the BNP's view is re the UK Armed Forces & the Military. Ok try this senario, Conservatives get the largest number of seats, but not an outright majority. David Cameron offers Nick Clegg the post of Defence Secretary in a Tory / Lib Dem goverment?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lib-Dems
Raise pay to levels of new police officers.
Withdraw from Afghanistan
Cancel any like for like replacement of trident
Cancel Eurofighter Tranche 3B
Slash defence procurement spending.
Raise pay to levels of new police officers.
Withdraw from Afghanistan
Cancel any like for like replacement of trident
Cancel Eurofighter Tranche 3B
Slash defence procurement spending.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: hull
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BNP Defence Policy:
The British National Party — Blog
British soldiers’ lives are one of the most valuable assets this nation has, and should only be risked in conflicts in which British interests are directly affected.
This simple and logical core belief is paramount to the British National Party’s defence policy, which demands self-sufficiency for our island nation in all aspects.
As such, the BNP is committed to withdrawing from the illegal and immoral wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the prosecution for war crimes of all Westminster officials who deliberately tricked this nation into those conflicts which have cost billions and at least 300 British lives.
The people to be prosecuted for war crimes will include the leaders of the parliamentary political parties who supported the war — Labour’s Blair and Brown, the Tory’s Hague, Duncan Smith, Howard and Cameron — and all officials who conspired to prepare the pack of lies which provided the “justification” for the invasion of Iraq.
A BNP government will never commit British troops to any conflict which does not directly affect British interests — ever.
Britain can only be safe if it is able to defend itself without being dependent on any other country. Britain therefore needs to have a credible and independent defence against all threats — and the ability to use this wisely.
Successive cuts in defence spending have left Britain’s armed forces perilously weak. We will boost Britain’s armed forces to ensure that they are able to deal with any emergency, and defend our homeland and our independence.
The BNP’s defence policy is to:
- Strengthen our conventional forces;
- Retain a genuinely independent nuclear deterrent and produce all our weaponry in Britain;
- Only commit British forces when British national interests are at stake;
- Preserve and restore our historic County Regiments;
- Bring our troops back from Germany and withdraw from NATO, since political developments make both commitments obsolete;
- Close all foreign military bases on British soil;
- Refuse to risk British lives in meddling ‘peacekeeping’ missions in parts of the world where no British interests are at stake;
- Restore national service for our young with the option of civil or military service.
The time has come for change.
Some seriously radical suggestions, but some good stuff too....
Until this SDR nobody will commit to anything...
The British National Party — Blog
British soldiers’ lives are one of the most valuable assets this nation has, and should only be risked in conflicts in which British interests are directly affected.
This simple and logical core belief is paramount to the British National Party’s defence policy, which demands self-sufficiency for our island nation in all aspects.
As such, the BNP is committed to withdrawing from the illegal and immoral wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the prosecution for war crimes of all Westminster officials who deliberately tricked this nation into those conflicts which have cost billions and at least 300 British lives.
The people to be prosecuted for war crimes will include the leaders of the parliamentary political parties who supported the war — Labour’s Blair and Brown, the Tory’s Hague, Duncan Smith, Howard and Cameron — and all officials who conspired to prepare the pack of lies which provided the “justification” for the invasion of Iraq.
A BNP government will never commit British troops to any conflict which does not directly affect British interests — ever.
Britain can only be safe if it is able to defend itself without being dependent on any other country. Britain therefore needs to have a credible and independent defence against all threats — and the ability to use this wisely.
Successive cuts in defence spending have left Britain’s armed forces perilously weak. We will boost Britain’s armed forces to ensure that they are able to deal with any emergency, and defend our homeland and our independence.
The BNP’s defence policy is to:
- Strengthen our conventional forces;
- Retain a genuinely independent nuclear deterrent and produce all our weaponry in Britain;
- Only commit British forces when British national interests are at stake;
- Preserve and restore our historic County Regiments;
- Bring our troops back from Germany and withdraw from NATO, since political developments make both commitments obsolete;
- Close all foreign military bases on British soil;
- Refuse to risk British lives in meddling ‘peacekeeping’ missions in parts of the world where no British interests are at stake;
- Restore national service for our young with the option of civil or military service.
The time has come for change.
Some seriously radical suggestions, but some good stuff too....
Until this SDR nobody will commit to anything...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: England
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: norfolk
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To my mind these minor parties can promise what ever they like, because even they know that there is no chance that they will be in a position to enforce them, and unless there is a hung vote, that includes the Lib Dems.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Age: 35
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a handy site that allows side by side comparison on different policies:
Compare Political Party Policies - Pocket Politics
Choose the parties, hit the button then choose the defence tab at the top...
Compare Political Party Policies - Pocket Politics
Choose the parties, hit the button then choose the defence tab at the top...
Stinky,
Thanks for this info, a considerable amount, if not all of it, makes sense to me & I can understand where you are comming from, it's a matter of getting the message over to the masses.
Thanks for this info, a considerable amount, if not all of it, makes sense to me & I can understand where you are comming from, it's a matter of getting the message over to the masses.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How exactly will they "repair the broken Military Covenant" when they would also have sent troops to fight a war based on lies??, the very issue that broke the Military Covenant in the first place
They're all the same, sh1t is sh1t no matter what colour the wrapper.
They're all the same, sh1t is sh1t no matter what colour the wrapper.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ice station kilo
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skint !
UK PLC is skint, broke , potless or what ever term you want to use whoever ends up in power you can expect a squeez on all public spending, the big problem for the readers of this forum is that they are an easy target.
The big issue is how much money will be cut from the UK defence budget not will one or other party cut spending.
Unfortunatly the place that could give real spending cuts without damage to the front line is the place that would be in charge of making spending cuts, but the MoD are hardly likely to chose to cut themselfs!
The places that I would like to see savings made would be, Defence contracts put out to more companies not the "usual suspects" who seem to charge a lot and deliver the least that they can get away with, the "elf & safety" police that spend a lot of money on the latest fad in buildings and infrastructure but compleatly ignore the front line kit because it is not part of their remit, and I would enforce defence contracts with a rod of iron as I see an attitude in the forces of "you cant win in a dispute with a contractor"............that must stop.
What I think I will see is the Puma force simply not replaced, the end of another fighter unit or two, the UAS disbanded and that is just in RAF terms I am sure the Army and Navy will be cut in the same way, what won't be cut is the big house in whitehall.
The big issue is how much money will be cut from the UK defence budget not will one or other party cut spending.
Unfortunatly the place that could give real spending cuts without damage to the front line is the place that would be in charge of making spending cuts, but the MoD are hardly likely to chose to cut themselfs!
The places that I would like to see savings made would be, Defence contracts put out to more companies not the "usual suspects" who seem to charge a lot and deliver the least that they can get away with, the "elf & safety" police that spend a lot of money on the latest fad in buildings and infrastructure but compleatly ignore the front line kit because it is not part of their remit, and I would enforce defence contracts with a rod of iron as I see an attitude in the forces of "you cant win in a dispute with a contractor"............that must stop.
What I think I will see is the Puma force simply not replaced, the end of another fighter unit or two, the UAS disbanded and that is just in RAF terms I am sure the Army and Navy will be cut in the same way, what won't be cut is the big house in whitehall.