ANALYSIS: Miltary faces 'perfect storm' of budget vs need
Thread Starter
ANALYSIS: Miltary faces 'perfect storm' of budget vs need
A very interesting article on Flight Global, with the opening paragraphs setting the scene.
Further on in the article:-
Seems to me that the thrust of his speech at a conference of the UK Royal Air Force Air Combat Support Group is very much on the mark (and that he probably will not be getting any Christmas cards from Army types).
European defence forces are facing a “perfect storm”, and those in the UK are at its eye. So says Andrew Dorman, professor of international security in the Defence Studies Department at King’s College London and a lecturer at the UK Joint Services Command and Staff College in Shrivenham.
The forces energising the storm are many, Dorman says, but he sums up the challenge as “ambiguous warfare in an age of austerity”. The “ambiguous” tag refers to the enemy not always being easy to identify; it may be a group rather than a nation and in a state of flux rather than being a recognisable entity. Since 2010, when the UK’s last Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) was carried out, the world has changed dramatically, he points out, and plans for the UK’s defence and for projecting its influence envisaged then look hopelessly inappropriate now. Finally, budget austerity completes the storm’s destructive power.
The forces energising the storm are many, Dorman says, but he sums up the challenge as “ambiguous warfare in an age of austerity”. The “ambiguous” tag refers to the enemy not always being easy to identify; it may be a group rather than a nation and in a state of flux rather than being a recognisable entity. Since 2010, when the UK’s last Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) was carried out, the world has changed dramatically, he points out, and plans for the UK’s defence and for projecting its influence envisaged then look hopelessly inappropriate now. Finally, budget austerity completes the storm’s destructive power.
Meanwhile, Dorman’s judgements about the existing FF 2020 in the present context are scathing, calling its defined force structure “an unaffordable, land-centric, top-heavy military designed to fail”. Personnel cuts at the last review were at the front line, with hardly any reductions at the one-star level and above, he notes. The Royal Navy, he believes, needs more destroyers and frigates but is getting two aircraft carriers which may end up with insufficient numbers of embarked aircraft, and it has amphibious forces when the need for the latter is getting increasingly difficult to justify. It is clear that Dorman would be surprised if the UK gets the promised numbers of Lockheed F-35B combat aircraft after the 2015 SDSR.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
None of this is rocket science. The gap between the capabilities we need to carry out the foreign and security policies of the UK government and the money available to fund those capabilities grows ever wider.
All to often the very next step in the debate is a half-educated rant about other budgets, wastage, yada, yada yada.
Austerity has a very long way to go [read up on the "soggy recovery" - more and more analysts feel we are going to live a very long time in very austere world]
There will be no blank cheques for the military - just a great many hard and unpopular choices.
And as for those ****ing carriers, don't get me started.
All to often the very next step in the debate is a half-educated rant about other budgets, wastage, yada, yada yada.
Austerity has a very long way to go [read up on the "soggy recovery" - more and more analysts feel we are going to live a very long time in very austere world]
There will be no blank cheques for the military - just a great many hard and unpopular choices.
And as for those ****ing carriers, don't get me started.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC News - Long, long slog to mend public finances
Read this...it's Peston doing his thing, but the meat of it comes from the OBR
This quote is particularly grim
It shows that that if a new Tory government delivered on its pledge to protect spending on schools and hospitals, the cuts for other public services - such as the police, courts, social services, local government and so on - would be so big as perhaps to defy credibility.
Defence would come under "...and so on" in that quote.
Read this...it's Peston doing his thing, but the meat of it comes from the OBR
This quote is particularly grim
It shows that that if a new Tory government delivered on its pledge to protect spending on schools and hospitals, the cuts for other public services - such as the police, courts, social services, local government and so on - would be so big as perhaps to defy credibility.
Defence would come under "...and so on" in that quote.
"The second story is that the best performing, big developed economy in the world - that's us by the way, as assessed by speed of GDP growth - is generating far less tax than expected.
And the biggest shortfall, roughly half of it, is in income tax, which reflects the creation of lots of new low wage jobs and the absence of meaningful pay rises for millions."
And the biggest shortfall, roughly half of it, is in income tax, which reflects the creation of lots of new low wage jobs and the absence of meaningful pay rises for millions."
Should you be short of comedic reading material, the following link is to the 2010 manifestos (see in the Health section for further links to the other parties)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/elec...manifesto.html
The Conservatives undertook to eliminate the bulk of the Deficit by 2015. The deficit has in fact risen slightly. The projected date for eliminating the bulk of the deficit is now 2018/9. In other words, the five year target is still 5 years way. Jam tomorrow.
Last edited by Fox3WheresMyBanana; 4th Dec 2014 at 02:57.
Nevertheless, listening to the utter rubbish spouted by the aptly named Ed Balls yesterday, just imagine how broke we'd be if that little non-entity Miliband was running the country.....
There's no golden bullet, but the country is doing well under the current government. Unfortunately ill-educated oiks and mad fascists are allowed to vote, so whether DC will still be at the helm next year is uncertain. I certainly hope he will.
But just how much more money will be thrown into the black hole of NHS incompetence?
Now that the UK is out of Afghanistan, just how many Chinooks and C-130s does the country really need? I wouldn't be surprised to see a reduction in the SH fleet, with many aircraft mothballed and for the C-130s to be retired early as Atlas comes into operational service.
There's no golden bullet, but the country is doing well under the current government. Unfortunately ill-educated oiks and mad fascists are allowed to vote, so whether DC will still be at the helm next year is uncertain. I certainly hope he will.
But just how much more money will be thrown into the black hole of NHS incompetence?
Now that the UK is out of Afghanistan, just how many Chinooks and C-130s does the country really need? I wouldn't be surprised to see a reduction in the SH fleet, with many aircraft mothballed and for the C-130s to be retired early as Atlas comes into operational service.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the question more one of need being a necessity and most of our equipment programme being top end aspiration?
Perhaps we need DSD that is far more brutally realistic and an equipment and manning solution that is adequate.
Perhaps we need DSD that is far more brutally realistic and an equipment and manning solution that is adequate.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um, I fail to see why less income tax was unexpected. The Government was fully aware, as was everybody else, that low wage jobs were the ones being created. This is logical rubbish, nevermind evidently dumb policy.
But just how much more money will be thrown into the black hole of NHS incompetence?
The military folk I know are clever, astute people...they need to adjust to the realities of the world we live in and make their career choices accordingly...based on the needs of themselves and their families.
There will be no blank cheques for the military - just a great many hard and unpopular choices.
Also not helped by the petty inter-service willy waving - if one service chief pops his head above the parapet and says 'no' one of the other two will soon pipe up with 'give us the assets (or more realistically the money) and we will make it work' (even though that money will no doubt be diverted to their single service 'pet project' instead resulting in more 'risk'). And this is not a swipe at any particular service - all three are as bad as each other.
Been a long time since a Chief of the Defence Staff has taken a stand whilst in post. Always amuses me how quick they are to speak out once they take the uniform off......
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And as for the ring-fenced bloated overseas aid budget - don't get me started!!
That means fewer people. And what do you think your five stars will do when the ever-stretched forces are asked to do yet another unforeseen task...
a. Raise two fingers to the minister and tell him/her we're closed for more business?
b. Bend over the ministers desk, drop trousers (or raise skirt) and ask for it good n hard?
Use your heads people...if you want to be a workaholic, get your arse on the outside...you'll make a ton more money.
PS Wrathmonk...totally
Posted this elsewhere yesterday. Shows the scale of the challenge.
We are, as a country, determined to spend beyond our means. We spend north of £700Bn a year of which £460Bn (that's 66%) is split across three departments (Health, Education, Social Security - inc pensions) where there will in general be ever increasing demand, partly because we have an increasing population (both from immigration and an ageing population) and partly because the scope of those services will always tend to increase as well (treatment because we can, lifestyle issues, education scope etc etc). Two of those budgets are ringfenced and the other contains a component (pensions) that will only continue to increase whatever you do to other parts of it. This means that the burden of "trying to live within our means" falls disproportionately on other departments. Just so that's clear, the £84Bn to balance the budget would need to be found from around £270Bn of spending, across departments where the biggest of those remaining is (you've guessed it) the MoD at £38Bn. We going to get much of the £84Bn out of that? Or the Home office at £32bn? Or the next biggest, which is the support to home carers at £31Bn?
Delivery of services in the big three departments is predominantly (but not exclusively) via the public sector and any attempt to improve efficiency in a meaningful way (as opposed to mandating "efficiency savings", which end up being cuts) are resisted tooth and nail, some with good reason, others far less so.
We cannot drastically increase the tax take, because if we're honest, the big areas for tax take are mobile and can and will move out of our jurisdiction, with knock-on effects on employment and other taxation. As an illustration, there remains a significant body of people within this country that believe "I've paid me stamp, I'm entitled" - National Insurance collects £110Bn pa or put another way, less than 25% of what is required to support the three departments that form the cornerstone of the welfare state. The money fairy does not exist, so either we find more money from somewhere, or we stop spending as much (and no the DFID budget doesn't even scratch the surface). See graphic from the fount of all wisdom - the Grauniad.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/dat....zoomed-picture
In short, we need to stop and think what we're doing, because demand is always likely to exceed supply. A spending competition is why Ed Balls and Wallace are not to be trusted with anything more complicated than a crayon, let alone a bacon sandwich.
We are, as a country, determined to spend beyond our means. We spend north of £700Bn a year of which £460Bn (that's 66%) is split across three departments (Health, Education, Social Security - inc pensions) where there will in general be ever increasing demand, partly because we have an increasing population (both from immigration and an ageing population) and partly because the scope of those services will always tend to increase as well (treatment because we can, lifestyle issues, education scope etc etc). Two of those budgets are ringfenced and the other contains a component (pensions) that will only continue to increase whatever you do to other parts of it. This means that the burden of "trying to live within our means" falls disproportionately on other departments. Just so that's clear, the £84Bn to balance the budget would need to be found from around £270Bn of spending, across departments where the biggest of those remaining is (you've guessed it) the MoD at £38Bn. We going to get much of the £84Bn out of that? Or the Home office at £32bn? Or the next biggest, which is the support to home carers at £31Bn?
Delivery of services in the big three departments is predominantly (but not exclusively) via the public sector and any attempt to improve efficiency in a meaningful way (as opposed to mandating "efficiency savings", which end up being cuts) are resisted tooth and nail, some with good reason, others far less so.
We cannot drastically increase the tax take, because if we're honest, the big areas for tax take are mobile and can and will move out of our jurisdiction, with knock-on effects on employment and other taxation. As an illustration, there remains a significant body of people within this country that believe "I've paid me stamp, I'm entitled" - National Insurance collects £110Bn pa or put another way, less than 25% of what is required to support the three departments that form the cornerstone of the welfare state. The money fairy does not exist, so either we find more money from somewhere, or we stop spending as much (and no the DFID budget doesn't even scratch the surface). See graphic from the fount of all wisdom - the Grauniad.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/dat....zoomed-picture
In short, we need to stop and think what we're doing, because demand is always likely to exceed supply. A spending competition is why Ed Balls and Wallace are not to be trusted with anything more complicated than a crayon, let alone a bacon sandwich.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: London
Age: 50
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Autumn statement certainly sets the landscape for SDSR 15. Sadly, it will almost certainly be as painful as the last IMHO.
Beagle - whilst I don't disagree in principle regarding some hard decisions on exactly how many of the 24 'hard used' C-130Js can be removed from FE&R they remain a very busy force even post afghan. As for rotary the RAF has seen/is seeing a circa 50% cut with the deletion of merlin and seaking and a smaller puma force. Whilst cutting chinook capability may seem tempting they are more important than ever before to Army and 3 squadrons doesn't leave much fat.
In truth, and even with recent centre experience, it's hard to see where large RAF cuts will occur especially given the enduring Iraq commitment.
Beagle - whilst I don't disagree in principle regarding some hard decisions on exactly how many of the 24 'hard used' C-130Js can be removed from FE&R they remain a very busy force even post afghan. As for rotary the RAF has seen/is seeing a circa 50% cut with the deletion of merlin and seaking and a smaller puma force. Whilst cutting chinook capability may seem tempting they are more important than ever before to Army and 3 squadrons doesn't leave much fat.
In truth, and even with recent centre experience, it's hard to see where large RAF cuts will occur especially given the enduring Iraq commitment.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southern UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NHS isn't a Black Hole of Incompetence
Beagle, I'll have to pull you up on "the black hole of NHS incompetence".
I agree the health budget is huge, and the analysis by many here of the relative budgets of departments, spending cuts required and where they may fall is spot on.
However
"the NHS is the cheapest system in the world producing the best health outcomes. The New York-based Commonwealth Fund ranks 11 advanced countries' health systems for cost and health outcomes. Britain spends $3,404 (£2,000) per head on health compared with the $8,508 (£5,001) by the open-to-new-entrants US system, with the other nine countries in between."
Taken from
The NHS is loved and efficient, so why the obsession with reform? | Will Hutton | Comment is free | The Guardian
Now, you can shoot the messenger, Will Hutton does have a particular angle. I personally think the NHS is trying to do too much, and in an undoubted age of austerity should do less. But globally, healthcare costs are an issue. In the NHS, for all its faults, we have the most efficient system in the world.
I agree the health budget is huge, and the analysis by many here of the relative budgets of departments, spending cuts required and where they may fall is spot on.
However
"the NHS is the cheapest system in the world producing the best health outcomes. The New York-based Commonwealth Fund ranks 11 advanced countries' health systems for cost and health outcomes. Britain spends $3,404 (£2,000) per head on health compared with the $8,508 (£5,001) by the open-to-new-entrants US system, with the other nine countries in between."
Taken from
The NHS is loved and efficient, so why the obsession with reform? | Will Hutton | Comment is free | The Guardian
Now, you can shoot the messenger, Will Hutton does have a particular angle. I personally think the NHS is trying to do too much, and in an undoubted age of austerity should do less. But globally, healthcare costs are an issue. In the NHS, for all its faults, we have the most efficient system in the world.
All very interesting. All very sad.
Simple arithmetic. We have spent beyond our means and those who we appoint to manage our money have done very badly. But it is not defence which takes up the lions share.
For the period 2013 - 14 welfare took about 25% of Government money. Health & Education came second & third respectively. Defence took a mere 7% or so (behind national debt interest!)
I suspect, now we are out of Afghanistan, defence will take a major cut. So what will happen? Amalgamation of the RAF with the Army & Navy? Top down cuts? Let's see. But let's redefine our foreign policy so that we don't ever again spend billions on an empire that does not exist.
But we really do need to cut where it can make a significant effect. That is Welfare. Welfare, Welfare. That will also have a knock on effect. If we were not a soft-touch nation there would not be a lengthy queue of economic migrants trying to get into the UK.
Finally, we should look at overseas aid. Is it right that we send vast amounts of a money to other countries for them to waste it on rockets ships or corruption?
Simple arithmetic. We have spent beyond our means and those who we appoint to manage our money have done very badly. But it is not defence which takes up the lions share.
For the period 2013 - 14 welfare took about 25% of Government money. Health & Education came second & third respectively. Defence took a mere 7% or so (behind national debt interest!)
I suspect, now we are out of Afghanistan, defence will take a major cut. So what will happen? Amalgamation of the RAF with the Army & Navy? Top down cuts? Let's see. But let's redefine our foreign policy so that we don't ever again spend billions on an empire that does not exist.
But we really do need to cut where it can make a significant effect. That is Welfare. Welfare, Welfare. That will also have a knock on effect. If we were not a soft-touch nation there would not be a lengthy queue of economic migrants trying to get into the UK.
Finally, we should look at overseas aid. Is it right that we send vast amounts of a money to other countries for them to waste it on rockets ships or corruption?
NHS isn't a Black Hole of Incompetence,
How about the black of incompetence that is the Ministry of Defence and the Defence budget?
We have the fifth largest defence spend on the face of the planet, and yet face a constant round of capability reductions, holidays and falling numbers of absolutely everything.
The recent wars are a severe factor in this but have been largely funded from Government contingency reserve spending and not the defence budget.
Just imagine what the Israeli or Japanese forces would look like if they had our level of spending?
Something is rotten in the state of our military spending.
And it isn't the amount of money...
How about the black of incompetence that is the Ministry of Defence and the Defence budget?
We have the fifth largest defence spend on the face of the planet, and yet face a constant round of capability reductions, holidays and falling numbers of absolutely everything.
The recent wars are a severe factor in this but have been largely funded from Government contingency reserve spending and not the defence budget.
Just imagine what the Israeli or Japanese forces would look like if they had our level of spending?
Something is rotten in the state of our military spending.
And it isn't the amount of money...
I don't know what pay Fusilier Rigby would receive but I doubt it was anywhere near £25k, and he would have tax and other charges deducted from it.
As a nation we really need to have a national debate rathet than fumbling around on a shifting sands basis. Do we really want a 5* public sector matched to a belief in a significant global presence and capability?
If the answer is yes, then it will have to be paid for. This can either be through increased taxation or increased international borrowing.
Any sensible person should rule out increased borrowing so the real answer is pay more tax or fundamentally re-write how we do health, welfare, education, defence etc..
Sadly our political leadership on any side seem to be burying their heads in the sand with the standard lines of; we will spend more on the NHS, more on education, will lower taxation and borrow less etc..
If the main parties both agree that the UK needs to save or cut another £84Bn from non-ringfenced OGD budgets (as they appear to do), then I look forward to seeing their detailed plans of how they will achieve this prior to the election next May.
If the answer is yes, then it will have to be paid for. This can either be through increased taxation or increased international borrowing.
Any sensible person should rule out increased borrowing so the real answer is pay more tax or fundamentally re-write how we do health, welfare, education, defence etc..
Sadly our political leadership on any side seem to be burying their heads in the sand with the standard lines of; we will spend more on the NHS, more on education, will lower taxation and borrow less etc..
If the main parties both agree that the UK needs to save or cut another £84Bn from non-ringfenced OGD budgets (as they appear to do), then I look forward to seeing their detailed plans of how they will achieve this prior to the election next May.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'government' is all about putting public money in to private hands. The public sector is being dismantled, we are paying for services twice over whilst they receive an 11% payrise and fill their gold plated pension pots
The number of billionaires has doubled during 'austerity', meanwhile the national debt is costing £1billion per week in interest alone.
Start asking "WHY" are there Foodbanks "WHY" are 5M people living on poverty wages "WHY" are 90,000 children homeless this Christmas.
They couldn't run a sweet shop, let alone a defence budget.
The number of billionaires has doubled during 'austerity', meanwhile the national debt is costing £1billion per week in interest alone.
Start asking "WHY" are there Foodbanks "WHY" are 5M people living on poverty wages "WHY" are 90,000 children homeless this Christmas.
They couldn't run a sweet shop, let alone a defence budget.
The public sector is being dismantled
The number of billionaires has doubled during 'austerity',
Start asking "WHY" are there Foodbanks "WHY" are 5M people living on poverty wages "WHY" are 90,000 children homeless this Christmas.
To say there are 5m in the UK on "poverty wages" is an insult to the genuine poor throughout the word. Again ask yourself "Why are so many people clamouring to enter the UK?"
If you want to know why so many kids are homeless just look at all the Leftist policies that sneer at, and strive towards dismantling the family unit.
They couldn't run a sweet shop
Pious, indeed!
