SDSR 2016?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WTF I have not seen a single projection anyway that suggests we are likely to get a balanced supply of housing anywhere in the next 50 years. Where on earth do you get this stuff from, or is it just some sort of wishful thinking???
As for austerity being over-hyped...Stephanie Flaunders wrote a lengthy piece about this very issue circa 2010, before the last election. Basically she pointed out that the level of cuts needed to balance the books were so large they were simply not do-able - the public would never tolerate the public service levels left
it's just a matter of who is going to be the one who finally ends it being completely free at the point of delivery
cross party consensus that the housing market needs to be flooded with new homes
The real problem is over-population; the UK (well mainly the South East and Midlands) has an unsustainable level of population. The UK is already one of the most densely populated countries in Europe and we are simply running out of space (based on the premise that you also need to retain farmland to feed the ever growing population, have to have space for roads and railways to get the ever growing poulation to work, need space for more hospitals and schools to support the ever growing population etc etc).
Stendec5
Please! It’s NOT the “so called EU” it actually IS the EU, and I don’t really see how increasing UK unemployment by disengaging from our single largest market place is going to help in any way in your little fantasy of huge fleets of shiny war fighting machines.
You have already been called to task over your obsession with the Overseas Aid budget, despite many valid arguments that have been made that, pound for pound, the overseas aid expenditure does ten times as much good around the world than the defence budget does. I for one am very happy that Governments of all persuasions are honouring our international commitments in overseas aid and am content that my tax spend is being spent on giving clean water to impoverished children, providing the most basic of health care to some of the poorest people on the planet and immunising children against diseases that in the first world have not been seen for generations. THAT is what defines a nation as great, not its ability to kill people.
glad rag,
Many thanks for your intellectually brilliant contribution...
Party Animal,
Why should defence be treated as some kind of untouchable insurance policy and not health, education and welfare? I agree with you over the political in fighting between the 3 services, but strongly disagree about any committee analysing the views of the defence chiefs before making strategic decisions. That is for the politicians to do and then the defence chiefs implement that policy with the resources allocated. It’s not as if we are in any kind of 1940 situation. If we were to have that committee make its decisions on purely UK defence matters, then we would end up with armed forces barely larger and more capable than those of Eire.
I also don't see the point of blaming the Blair/Brown Government for our financial mess. We were an integral part of a global financial system that simply demonstrated that it did not work. Where Labour spent on public services the Tories would have done the same but on Tax cuts, basic end point would have been the same.
I think that Bastardeaux is right in claiming that this endless austerity and budget deficit issue is indeed somewhat overhyped. We have plenty of cash for the basic core of public services, and whether we spend 0, 11 or 18 billion on overseas aid will not have any dramatic impact on that fact.
Please! It’s NOT the “so called EU” it actually IS the EU, and I don’t really see how increasing UK unemployment by disengaging from our single largest market place is going to help in any way in your little fantasy of huge fleets of shiny war fighting machines.
You have already been called to task over your obsession with the Overseas Aid budget, despite many valid arguments that have been made that, pound for pound, the overseas aid expenditure does ten times as much good around the world than the defence budget does. I for one am very happy that Governments of all persuasions are honouring our international commitments in overseas aid and am content that my tax spend is being spent on giving clean water to impoverished children, providing the most basic of health care to some of the poorest people on the planet and immunising children against diseases that in the first world have not been seen for generations. THAT is what defines a nation as great, not its ability to kill people.
glad rag,
Many thanks for your intellectually brilliant contribution...
Party Animal,
Why should defence be treated as some kind of untouchable insurance policy and not health, education and welfare? I agree with you over the political in fighting between the 3 services, but strongly disagree about any committee analysing the views of the defence chiefs before making strategic decisions. That is for the politicians to do and then the defence chiefs implement that policy with the resources allocated. It’s not as if we are in any kind of 1940 situation. If we were to have that committee make its decisions on purely UK defence matters, then we would end up with armed forces barely larger and more capable than those of Eire.
I also don't see the point of blaming the Blair/Brown Government for our financial mess. We were an integral part of a global financial system that simply demonstrated that it did not work. Where Labour spent on public services the Tories would have done the same but on Tax cuts, basic end point would have been the same.
I think that Bastardeaux is right in claiming that this endless austerity and budget deficit issue is indeed somewhat overhyped. We have plenty of cash for the basic core of public services, and whether we spend 0, 11 or 18 billion on overseas aid will not have any dramatic impact on that fact.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real problem is over-population; the UK (well mainly the South East and Midlands) has an unsustainable level of population. The UK is already one of the most densely populated countries in Europe and we are simply running out of space (based on the premise that you also need to retain farmland to feed the ever growing population, have to have space for roads and railways to get the ever growing poulation to work, need space for more hospitals and schools to support the ever growing population etc etc).
RE population density:
I think if you consider how urbanised the population is, the density is not all that significant. i.e. there may be lots of people but they're mostly bunched up in cities.
If, for example, you added a tiny bit of land area to a city and it would soak up huge numbers of people, leaving the countryside unaffected.
I think if you consider how urbanised the population is, the density is not all that significant. i.e. there may be lots of people but they're mostly bunched up in cities.
If, for example, you added a tiny bit of land area to a city and it would soak up huge numbers of people, leaving the countryside unaffected.
pr00ne - you really must be Alistair Campbell. I haven't seen as much spin since I last used my electric drill!
And there is no evidence that disengaging would do so. That is the exact scare tactic that the pro-EU politicians use - without any underlying substantiation!
That of course is based on an assumption that this where "our" tax pound is spent. Of course a lot of it is rightly spent in the way that you suggest, but that doesn't mean all of it gets through to the tarhget audience. And I would be much happier if all other governments matched our government's generosity.
Bastardeux
Lies, damn lies and Statistics - isn't that the saying? This is the actual statistic you were looking for:
That is of course "urban" and includes parks and gardens in town and cities. Additionally much of the country is uninhabitable, by which I mean too remote, too mountainous, too marshy etc to even consider building houses on. Have you tried walking on Rannoch Moor? Highly recommended, but not somewhere anyone is going to live for some time to come. If you rule out cutting down woods/forests, go back to banning building on flood plains etc you are rapidly elft with concreting over farm land - exactly the land we need to grow some (if not all) of our food. So the figure of 1 or 2 % that you quote just doesn't add up.
As for population and house building? Well that is going to be much trickier and would probably require us to cede from the EU. Managed migration is what is required and that means you have to be able to close your borders to all but those that "we" are willing to accept. It works in Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc so it could work here but it isn't going to be an overnight solution. What is undeniable, is the infrastructure (by which I mean schools, hospitals, transport networks etc etc) in the SE of England simply cannot sustain the expontential growth in population (one might argue that it has already gone past that point as one who has to commute in and around London and the Home Counties will attest).
Still this is way off topic and I apologise for the thread creep
- so now back to SDSR 15 or 16.
I don’t really see how increasing UK unemployment by disengaging from our single largest market place is going to help
I for one am very happy that Governments of all persuasions are honouring our international commitments in overseas aid and am content that my tax spend is being spent on giving clean water to impoverished children, providing the most basic of health care to some of the poorest people on the planet and immunising children against diseases
Bastardeux
Lies, damn lies and Statistics - isn't that the saying? This is the actual statistic you were looking for:
Having looked at all the information, they calculated that "6.8% of the UK's land area is now classified as urban" (a definition that includes rural development and roads).
The urban landscape accounts for 10.6% of England, 1.9% of Scotland, 3.6% of Northern Ireland and 4.1% of Wales.
The urban landscape accounts for 10.6% of England, 1.9% of Scotland, 3.6% of Northern Ireland and 4.1% of Wales.
As for population and house building? Well that is going to be much trickier and would probably require us to cede from the EU. Managed migration is what is required and that means you have to be able to close your borders to all but those that "we" are willing to accept. It works in Canada, USA, Australia, New Zealand etc so it could work here but it isn't going to be an overnight solution. What is undeniable, is the infrastructure (by which I mean schools, hospitals, transport networks etc etc) in the SE of England simply cannot sustain the expontential growth in population (one might argue that it has already gone past that point as one who has to commute in and around London and the Home Counties will attest).
Still this is way off topic and I apologise for the thread creep
- so now back to SDSR 15 or 16.
Last edited by Roland Pulfrew; 27th Mar 2014 at 17:28.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RP,
Thanks for putting us back on track. SDSR 2020 will also be an election year so should we not decouple the 2 events.
Has anyone got a clue when SDSR 15 is going to be released.
Thanks for putting us back on track. SDSR 2020 will also be an election year so should we not decouple the 2 events.
Has anyone got a clue when SDSR 15 is going to be released.
P T,
To the best of my knowledge (which has recently been proven to be rapidly becoming outdated!) SDSR15 is merely an intention of the current coalition government. Again, to the best of my knowledge, there is no formal requirement for a UK government to hold a 5 yearly SDSR, and I wasn't aware that the Labour party have stated their intention to hold one if they win the next election.
I can't see the coalition holding a SDSR before the election in May 2015, it would be a total waste of time and effort if they don't get back in.
Therefore options are:
Tories/current coalition re-elected - SDSR post may 2015.
Any other election result - who knows when the next SDSR will be?
One of the joys of pprune is that there is always someone out there who knows (or at least think they know) more than you - and they're normally very willing to prove that point. So no doubt my above comments with be either agreed with, or shot down, in the not too distant future.
By the way I have even mentioned what the effect a "yes" vote for Scottish independence this September would have on the possible timing/requirement/content of any future SDSR.
Interesting times......
To the best of my knowledge (which has recently been proven to be rapidly becoming outdated!) SDSR15 is merely an intention of the current coalition government. Again, to the best of my knowledge, there is no formal requirement for a UK government to hold a 5 yearly SDSR, and I wasn't aware that the Labour party have stated their intention to hold one if they win the next election.
I can't see the coalition holding a SDSR before the election in May 2015, it would be a total waste of time and effort if they don't get back in.
Therefore options are:
Tories/current coalition re-elected - SDSR post may 2015.
Any other election result - who knows when the next SDSR will be?
One of the joys of pprune is that there is always someone out there who knows (or at least think they know) more than you - and they're normally very willing to prove that point. So no doubt my above comments with be either agreed with, or shot down, in the not too distant future.
By the way I have even mentioned what the effect a "yes" vote for Scottish independence this September would have on the possible timing/requirement/content of any future SDSR.
Interesting times......
I suppose SDSR 2015 or 16 will very much depend on the international climate at the time, regardless of what kind of make up of Government we have by then. Their response will be governed as much by their political mind set as much by circumstance.
pr00ne,
You are proof that how everyone sees matters all very much depends on their political stripe. I've never read anything suggesting that every pound we spend on overseas aid does ten times as much good as every pound spent on defence, apart from an interview with a Tory MP who alluded to this point. I don't know what unit of measurement has been used in determining quite such a precise comparison, but I've heard the line from the current Government, which I don't imagine you to be particularly fond of, is that what we spend on overseas aid is in effect money spent averting the need for military confrontation down the road into the future. Almost like some form of protection money. This suggests that if we don't spend on overseas aid, one day the otherwise beneficiaries will gang up on us and give us a good kicking. Before they do that they'll have to straighten out their economic plight surely!? And when they do I imagine they wont view our hitherto philanthropy as something to be allowed to get in the way of any wider disagreements.
Best Regards,
FB
pr00ne,
You are proof that how everyone sees matters all very much depends on their political stripe. I've never read anything suggesting that every pound we spend on overseas aid does ten times as much good as every pound spent on defence, apart from an interview with a Tory MP who alluded to this point. I don't know what unit of measurement has been used in determining quite such a precise comparison, but I've heard the line from the current Government, which I don't imagine you to be particularly fond of, is that what we spend on overseas aid is in effect money spent averting the need for military confrontation down the road into the future. Almost like some form of protection money. This suggests that if we don't spend on overseas aid, one day the otherwise beneficiaries will gang up on us and give us a good kicking. Before they do that they'll have to straighten out their economic plight surely!? And when they do I imagine they wont view our hitherto philanthropy as something to be allowed to get in the way of any wider disagreements.
Best Regards,
FB
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Grimsby
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. The obsession with lavishing huge sums of taxpayers money on myriad foreign projects is a political animal beloved of the "liberal"-lefties. I read of how a programme that subsidised pensioners swimming lessons in a UK northern town (cost approx £3,000 per annum) was axed to save money. But £2.2 millions to fund the building of library in Uganda was ok'd without hesitation. Just one example among thousands.
However, until these cretins have their grubby little fingers prized from the levers of power (one way or the other) this insanity will continue.
Also, given that 75% of our "laws" now emanate from the so-called "EU" the concept of democratic accountability is gradually becoming something more in the realm of nostalgia than fact.
However, until these cretins have their grubby little fingers prized from the levers of power (one way or the other) this insanity will continue.
Also, given that 75% of our "laws" now emanate from the so-called "EU" the concept of democratic accountability is gradually becoming something more in the realm of nostalgia than fact.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Some Salutary Thoughts for the next Strategic Defence Review (whenever it may be).
Rudyard Kipling's "Natural Theology": (Pinched from "Poetry Lovers' Page"):
Progressive
Money spent on an Army or Fleet
Is homicidal lunacy. . . .
My son has been killed in the Mons retreat,
Why is the Lord afflicting me?
Why are murder, pillage and arson
And rape allowed by the Deity?
I will write to the "Times", deriding our parson
Because my God has afflicted me.
Chorus
We had a kettle: we let it leak:
Our not repairing it made it worse.
We haven't had any tea for a week. . .
The bottom is out of the Universe!
Conclusion
This was none of the good Lord's pleasure,
For the Spirit He breathed in Man is free;
But what comes after is measure for measure,
And not a God that afflicteth thee.
As was the sowing so the reaping
Is now and evermore shall be.
Thou art delivered to thine own keeping.
Only Thyself hath afflicted thee!
Progressive
Money spent on an Army or Fleet
Is homicidal lunacy. . . .
My son has been killed in the Mons retreat,
Why is the Lord afflicting me?
Why are murder, pillage and arson
And rape allowed by the Deity?
I will write to the "Times", deriding our parson
Because my God has afflicted me.
Chorus
We had a kettle: we let it leak:
Our not repairing it made it worse.
We haven't had any tea for a week. . .
The bottom is out of the Universe!
Conclusion
This was none of the good Lord's pleasure,
For the Spirit He breathed in Man is free;
But what comes after is measure for measure,
And not a God that afflicteth thee.
As was the sowing so the reaping
Is now and evermore shall be.
Thou art delivered to thine own keeping.
Only Thyself hath afflicted thee!
Last edited by Danny42C; 27th Mar 2014 at 22:26. Reason: Typo.
Roland Pulfrew,
There is ample evidence. Just read anything by the CEO of Toyota for example, who has stated that his car and engine factories are here precisely because we ARE in the EU, and that if we were to leave they would seriously reconsider relocating as they mainly export their products (85%) to the EU and would have no wish to be outside that trading area.
This would apply to a whole range of industries who manufacture in the UK and export over 80% of their products abroad, mainly to the EU.
Massey Ferguson closed down their Coventry manufacturing plant, resulting in 2000 job losses, and transferred it to France because the UK didn’t join the Euro!
The world is morphing into a series of huge trading blocks that will be dominated by very large and populous countries such as China, India, Indonesia etc. By trading as the EU we are a major player in that market and can trade and negotiate accordingly. As a tiny off shore island of Europe we would have no such advantage and would have no bargaining power with these huge trading blocks at all.
If the UK, or rump UK if Scotland goes its own way, left the EU, we would be an extremely small scale competitor to the EU who would see absolutely no advantage in giving us any form of advantageous trading relationship, why on earth should they, we chose to leave?
I do agree with you on your points on overseas aid, no argument there. I am sure that it could be better spent and the fact that we are going to stop aid to such places as India is welcome.
Biggus,
I think you are spot on with your reading of the status quo post election. There is no commitment from ANY party save the Lib-Dem/Tory coalition to a 2015 SDSR and if any party is returned with a working majority or if the coalition is anything other than a Lib-Dem/Tory one, then I think that the concept of SDSR2015 will be dead and buried.
The Scottish independence vote will have a huge effect on any potential SDSR, if those in Whitehall who are responsible for such things are not taking this into account then they are fools.
Finningley Boy,
Well yes, of course we see things from our own political perspective, though the fact that I HAVE seen a lot of NGO produced evidence of the ten times better spend effect of the OA budget as compared to the defence budget is not actually anything to do with my political persuasion, just reported fact. The fact that the Tories and Lib Dems are doing nothing to reduce it must mean that they agree too, it’s NOT just a Labour thing this OA budget you know.
I certainly am NOT very fond of this current Government, but am actually proud of their stance on a few things, overseas aid being one of them.
Stendec5,
Oh dear! “liberal-lefties?’ Really. You may not have noticed but we are currently governed by a Tory Party dominated coalition and it is THEY who are protecting the overseas aid budget.
75% of our laws emanate from the EU? Do you have any idea how old English Law actually is? I doubt if even 7% has been incorporated since the birth of the EEC, never mind the EU.
Finally, Roland Pulfrew, I have long thought that your Pprune monika is THE best that I have ever seen!
There is ample evidence. Just read anything by the CEO of Toyota for example, who has stated that his car and engine factories are here precisely because we ARE in the EU, and that if we were to leave they would seriously reconsider relocating as they mainly export their products (85%) to the EU and would have no wish to be outside that trading area.
This would apply to a whole range of industries who manufacture in the UK and export over 80% of their products abroad, mainly to the EU.
Massey Ferguson closed down their Coventry manufacturing plant, resulting in 2000 job losses, and transferred it to France because the UK didn’t join the Euro!
The world is morphing into a series of huge trading blocks that will be dominated by very large and populous countries such as China, India, Indonesia etc. By trading as the EU we are a major player in that market and can trade and negotiate accordingly. As a tiny off shore island of Europe we would have no such advantage and would have no bargaining power with these huge trading blocks at all.
If the UK, or rump UK if Scotland goes its own way, left the EU, we would be an extremely small scale competitor to the EU who would see absolutely no advantage in giving us any form of advantageous trading relationship, why on earth should they, we chose to leave?
I do agree with you on your points on overseas aid, no argument there. I am sure that it could be better spent and the fact that we are going to stop aid to such places as India is welcome.
Biggus,
I think you are spot on with your reading of the status quo post election. There is no commitment from ANY party save the Lib-Dem/Tory coalition to a 2015 SDSR and if any party is returned with a working majority or if the coalition is anything other than a Lib-Dem/Tory one, then I think that the concept of SDSR2015 will be dead and buried.
The Scottish independence vote will have a huge effect on any potential SDSR, if those in Whitehall who are responsible for such things are not taking this into account then they are fools.
Finningley Boy,
Well yes, of course we see things from our own political perspective, though the fact that I HAVE seen a lot of NGO produced evidence of the ten times better spend effect of the OA budget as compared to the defence budget is not actually anything to do with my political persuasion, just reported fact. The fact that the Tories and Lib Dems are doing nothing to reduce it must mean that they agree too, it’s NOT just a Labour thing this OA budget you know.
I certainly am NOT very fond of this current Government, but am actually proud of their stance on a few things, overseas aid being one of them.
Stendec5,
Oh dear! “liberal-lefties?’ Really. You may not have noticed but we are currently governed by a Tory Party dominated coalition and it is THEY who are protecting the overseas aid budget.
75% of our laws emanate from the EU? Do you have any idea how old English Law actually is? I doubt if even 7% has been incorporated since the birth of the EEC, never mind the EU.
Finally, Roland Pulfrew, I have long thought that your Pprune monika is THE best that I have ever seen!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
other than a Lib-Dem/Tory one, then I think that the concept of SDSR2015 will be dead and buried
SDSR 15 is going to be a properly thought out stretegic defence review (Or as far as it can be without a comprehensive national security strategy), based on different levels of funding and it will be up to whichever party that wins the election to choose a strategy based on whichever level of funding they so choose, not some arbitrary money saving exercise in the space of 3 months.
Bastardeux,
I have no doubt that a LOT of people are working on it, but it is the policy of the current incumbent Government, and if that Government is not returned in May 2015 then whoever is holding the reigns of power will have no obligation to do anything called SDSR 2015. There will be decisions to be made of course, decisions that are currently not being addressed politically ahead of SDSR2015, things such as a new MMA, what to do with the second carrier, Sentinel, and how many F-35’s to order etc etc.
But this will all be pie in the sky until the new administration has time to look at the books and decide how much it wishes to allocate to defence over the next five years.
Only then will decisions be made, and I’m sure that the background work being done right now will be utilised, but until we know how much money is to be spent, then it’s all just idle waffle.
I have no doubt that a LOT of people are working on it, but it is the policy of the current incumbent Government, and if that Government is not returned in May 2015 then whoever is holding the reigns of power will have no obligation to do anything called SDSR 2015. There will be decisions to be made of course, decisions that are currently not being addressed politically ahead of SDSR2015, things such as a new MMA, what to do with the second carrier, Sentinel, and how many F-35’s to order etc etc.
But this will all be pie in the sky until the new administration has time to look at the books and decide how much it wishes to allocate to defence over the next five years.
Only then will decisions be made, and I’m sure that the background work being done right now will be utilised, but until we know how much money is to be spent, then it’s all just idle waffle.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the introduction to SDSR 10:
As to whether the new government has the courage to continue with cuttig our cloth to suit our purse is almost guaranteed from the above I think
1.3
We are committed to undertaking further
strategic defence and security reviews every five
years. One clear lesson since the last Strategic
Defence Review in 1998 is the need more
frequently to reassess capabilities against a
changing strategic environment. We must avoid
the twin mistakes of retaining too much legacy
equipment for which there is no requirement,
or tying ourselves into unnecessarily ambitious
future capabilities. We have therefore identified
the forces and capabilities we may need in 2020,
but deliberately focussed in this Review on the
decisions that need to be taken in the next four
years, and left to 2015 those decisions which can
better be taken in the light of further experience
in Afghanistan and developments in the wider
economic situation.
We are committed to undertaking further
strategic defence and security reviews every five
years. One clear lesson since the last Strategic
Defence Review in 1998 is the need more
frequently to reassess capabilities against a
changing strategic environment. We must avoid
the twin mistakes of retaining too much legacy
equipment for which there is no requirement,
or tying ourselves into unnecessarily ambitious
future capabilities. We have therefore identified
the forces and capabilities we may need in 2020,
but deliberately focussed in this Review on the
decisions that need to be taken in the next four
years, and left to 2015 those decisions which can
better be taken in the light of further experience
in Afghanistan and developments in the wider
economic situation.
prOOne
Thank you for proving my argument:
seriously reconsider = we may not move at all
outside the trading area = we may equally be in the trading area but outside the EU.
Perhaps because we import more from the EU than we export to the EU?
Continuing with your car industry analogy I saw quoted the other day that the UK imports £1.8B worth of vehicles from the EU (IIRC) annually, but we export only £1B worth - why would the EU wish to lose £0.8B worth of trade by messing around with trade agreements?
but JCB has stayed and exports globally. Did I see a map recently that showed every nation that uses a JCB of some type and pretty much the entire globe was covered.
- Thank God!!
Are you calling me a girl?!!?? 
Thank you for proving my argument:
Just read anything by the CEO of Toyota for example, who has stated that his car and engine factories are here precisely because we ARE in the EU, and that if we were to leave they would seriously reconsider relocating as they mainly export their products (85%) to the EU and would have no wish to be outside that trading area.
outside the trading area = we may equally be in the trading area but outside the EU.
no advantage in giving us any form of advantageous trading relationship, why on earth should they
Continuing with your car industry analogy I saw quoted the other day that the UK imports £1.8B worth of vehicles from the EU (IIRC) annually, but we export only £1B worth - why would the EU wish to lose £0.8B worth of trade by messing around with trade agreements?
Massey Ferguson closed down their Coventry manufacturing plant
because the UK didn’t join the Euro
your Pprune monika
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there was an article in the Times this week pointing out that govt spending has to be returned to 1997 levels to balance the books properly
They reckon most of the easy stuff has been done and we still need to continue cutting until maybe 2018 or 2020 - and these will be very very painful cuts - NHS, Schools, pensions, universities and the armed forces
I'm not a great believer in SDSR's anyway - they always seem to be torn up after about 18 months
They reckon most of the easy stuff has been done and we still need to continue cutting until maybe 2018 or 2020 - and these will be very very painful cuts - NHS, Schools, pensions, universities and the armed forces
I'm not a great believer in SDSR's anyway - they always seem to be torn up after about 18 months