Forces braced for more cuts .....
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post 9/11 I suspect
I have no time for Corbyn - a classic left view of every "freedom fighter" plus a good dose of anti-Americanism
But that doesn't excuse May - she was, at best, a poor Home Secretary that never delivered (remember the Immigration target fiasco). We've also seen her inability to make a choice and stick to it several times recently - not least on BREXIT
I have no time for Corbyn - a classic left view of every "freedom fighter" plus a good dose of anti-Americanism
But that doesn't excuse May - she was, at best, a poor Home Secretary that never delivered (remember the Immigration target fiasco). We've also seen her inability to make a choice and stick to it several times recently - not least on BREXIT
https://www.gov.uk/government/public...ng-budget-2017
Charts 1 & 2 in the link are a good starting point. FY18 budget assumes a ~ £58Bn deficit between outgoings (spend) and receipts (taxes etc). Debt interest alone is almost the size of the defence budget, which is the fourth largest single departmental budget. Trouble is, the three above it comprise 60% of the total and are largely ring-fenced, one reason the pensions triple lock is under scrutiny. Add in debt interest and social care (from impact on NHS etc) as largely inviolable and you're at nigh-on 70% of the spend budget is committed.
Which leaves the rest of the departments fighting tooth and nail to retain their "share" or accept cuts / "efficiency savings" which can have a disproportionate effect on "output" - often expressed in reduction in manpower and subsequent retention issues.
Or we find a way to up the tax take by about 8% to remove the deficit and eventually release more money through reduced interest payments.
In reality, it's probably somewhere between the two, because it's difficult to see where a huge extra dollop of taxation can land easily and because at some stage we're going to have to stop routinely living beyond our means - particularly wrt funding overseas development, unlimited NHS care, triple-lock pensions etc.
In that context, extra money for defence is in the noise. What would be nice is a realisation that 2% GDP is a minimum, not a target to be feted. Just going back to 2.5% GDP would put an extra £12Bn a year in the pot.
Charts 1 & 2 in the link are a good starting point. FY18 budget assumes a ~ £58Bn deficit between outgoings (spend) and receipts (taxes etc). Debt interest alone is almost the size of the defence budget, which is the fourth largest single departmental budget. Trouble is, the three above it comprise 60% of the total and are largely ring-fenced, one reason the pensions triple lock is under scrutiny. Add in debt interest and social care (from impact on NHS etc) as largely inviolable and you're at nigh-on 70% of the spend budget is committed.
Which leaves the rest of the departments fighting tooth and nail to retain their "share" or accept cuts / "efficiency savings" which can have a disproportionate effect on "output" - often expressed in reduction in manpower and subsequent retention issues.
Or we find a way to up the tax take by about 8% to remove the deficit and eventually release more money through reduced interest payments.
In reality, it's probably somewhere between the two, because it's difficult to see where a huge extra dollop of taxation can land easily and because at some stage we're going to have to stop routinely living beyond our means - particularly wrt funding overseas development, unlimited NHS care, triple-lock pensions etc.
In that context, extra money for defence is in the noise. What would be nice is a realisation that 2% GDP is a minimum, not a target to be feted. Just going back to 2.5% GDP would put an extra £12Bn a year in the pot.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to quite like Mrs May as a fairly common sense individual who had done well to hold down what is widely regarded as a bit of a political poison chalice fo as long as she did. But she's sadly out of her depth as PM, as are many of her Cabinet, especially when it comes to security.
......................... I don't care what the PM or any of her cabinet say, numbers matter when you're trying to deal with and monitor the equivalent of a full Championship football team stadium.
......................... I don't care what the PM or any of her cabinet say, numbers matter when you're trying to deal with and monitor the equivalent of a full Championship football team stadium.
Agreed about numbers, how many do you think are necessary to protect the whole country?
The whole lot are out of their depth. Perhaps a hung parliament with the Tories winning the most seats will be the best result. Bojo the Clown, Davies, IDS, Reese Mogg et al will be very pissed off, but it might stop Brexit.
Strong and Stable my ar*se!
Strong and Stable my ar*se!
Doesn't take a lot of intellectual rigour to work out what's b0ll0cks & what isn't.
The recession wasn't caused by bankers it was caused by labour & they've cut ALL of the security forces, austerity has worked, it was all the fault of the poor, the unemployed & the elderly.
Trickle down economics is indubitably working.Corbyn voted for & supported the Iraq,Afghanistan,Libya & Syria conflicts, loves the country that has bank rolled ISIS or did I get that wrong?
The recession wasn't caused by bankers it was caused by labour & they've cut ALL of the security forces, austerity has worked, it was all the fault of the poor, the unemployed & the elderly.
Trickle down economics is indubitably working.Corbyn voted for & supported the Iraq,Afghanistan,Libya & Syria conflicts, loves the country that has bank rolled ISIS or did I get that wrong?
woptb,
The recession was caused by Labour? Are you ten years old? The huge global financial collapse, cos that's what it was, was caused by US sub prime lenders building up gigantic debt through selling mortgages to people with no or very little income and packaging up that debt into fantastically complicated financial instruments that were taken up voraciously by financial institutions around the world but manly in the US and UK. That bubble burst when the lenders defaulted on their mortgage debts and the whole thing unravelled at such a speed that if the major economies of the world had not stepped in with trillions of dollars/euros/pounds for the banks we would have seen financial meltdown and the end of capitalism.
Caused by Labour my *rse!
The recession was caused by Labour? Are you ten years old? The huge global financial collapse, cos that's what it was, was caused by US sub prime lenders building up gigantic debt through selling mortgages to people with no or very little income and packaging up that debt into fantastically complicated financial instruments that were taken up voraciously by financial institutions around the world but manly in the US and UK. That bubble burst when the lenders defaulted on their mortgage debts and the whole thing unravelled at such a speed that if the major economies of the world had not stepped in with trillions of dollars/euros/pounds for the banks we would have seen financial meltdown and the end of capitalism.
Caused by Labour my *rse!
Whoosh!
What was that?
I get it now!
What was that?
I get it now!
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, I would never write off Jeremy Corbyn. He's cleanly despatched New Labour. Then got his own people in around him and they appear very loyal. He has grown throughout this campaign. Very efficiently shafted PM May today over police numbers-she looks very strained now on TV.
I mean its still the Tories to throw and they will return again to power but May to be honest has really diminished - chickens came home to roost.
Back on thread, to balance the inevitable police resurge in numbers.......raise higher rate of tax may pay for some of it, but could we now suspend some military operations and return to UK some deployed forces> would this save immediate cash.
I mean **** the Poles and Lits and the rest of them. If we totally fall back on ops, will this save hard cash in the short term?
I mean its still the Tories to throw and they will return again to power but May to be honest has really diminished - chickens came home to roost.
Back on thread, to balance the inevitable police resurge in numbers.......raise higher rate of tax may pay for some of it, but could we now suspend some military operations and return to UK some deployed forces> would this save immediate cash.
I mean **** the Poles and Lits and the rest of them. If we totally fall back on ops, will this save hard cash in the short term?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
she looks very strained now on TV.
Thursday night promises to be interesting, with a possibility of chaos heaped on chaos if we end up in a hung parliament and TM gathering her over-priced skirts and exiting stage left.
When JC first got himself the leadership of the Labour party I wrote right here on pprune, that he had an outside shot (10%) of becoming the next PM (I meant in 2020 of course, but events dear boy, events). Most posters understandably found that notion incomprehensible. Right now I'd go about 30%...it still looks like TM will get over the line, but will it be by a big enough margin to save her bacon?
To address the original point of this thread, of course more cuts are coming, whoever wins. The economy dictates that. But if JC's lot end up in control, holy **** batman, it will be a massacre.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think JC has the Parliamentary Labour Party backing. My own Labour MP wont even mention his name or place it in her election literature (something that's gone on a lot with the others as well). Its interesting we could get a new PM of either hue with a lot of back stabbers right behind them right from the off.
But I would venture yes whatever's left will be binned and the money whatever money spent elsewhere. Spun out with new jobs for the ex service leavers in say the police, or border control.
But I would venture yes whatever's left will be binned and the money whatever money spent elsewhere. Spun out with new jobs for the ex service leavers in say the police, or border control.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
I am not sure why police numbers are an issue. In all three of the latest terrorist events they have performed commendably - particularly in the latest.
If there has been a failure it is in the security services who, it appears, had plenty of information on at least one of the latest 3 killers; and the budget for the security services has been massively increased over the last 10 years - including funding for another 2000 members in 2015.
If there has been a failure it is in the security services who, it appears, had plenty of information on at least one of the latest 3 killers; and the budget for the security services has been massively increased over the last 10 years - including funding for another 2000 members in 2015.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me we need more Police, we need more Doctors, we need more Nurses and we need more Military. However it doesn't matter who agrees to provide them 'on the streets' the fact remains, they are all highly trained Professionals - it takes years for them to reach the point where they are useful. Doctors take 5 years and then another 5 to make it to senior positions and levels of experience, Nurses 5 years, Policemen 3 years plus a further 2 years of specialization and Military probably at least 3 years (depending on service and role).
So what I am getting at here is that even if funds are agreed there is no immediate improvement in the situation overnight, and since everyone listed above takes at least 5 years to mature - and Politicians are notoriously 'short term' in their outlook, I can't see it happening. Plus the fact they are masters of spin and making figures show whatever they want............ let's face it the first thing whoever gets into power always says is 'we've looked at the figures and it's worse than we imagined so we really can't do most of the things we promised during the election........'
The real solution is a higher rate of income tax and a much better fiscal regime and oversight of how it's spent. That is far too radical and is the ultimate vote loser so will never happen. The reality is that the countries where there is a higher rate of tax have a higher standard of living (for example Finland, Sweden and Norway) - and we are not prepared to accept that level of taxation or commitment to society.
Just my two pennyworth...............
Arc
So what I am getting at here is that even if funds are agreed there is no immediate improvement in the situation overnight, and since everyone listed above takes at least 5 years to mature - and Politicians are notoriously 'short term' in their outlook, I can't see it happening. Plus the fact they are masters of spin and making figures show whatever they want............ let's face it the first thing whoever gets into power always says is 'we've looked at the figures and it's worse than we imagined so we really can't do most of the things we promised during the election........'
The real solution is a higher rate of income tax and a much better fiscal regime and oversight of how it's spent. That is far too radical and is the ultimate vote loser so will never happen. The reality is that the countries where there is a higher rate of tax have a higher standard of living (for example Finland, Sweden and Norway) - and we are not prepared to accept that level of taxation or commitment to society.
Just my two pennyworth...............
Arc
I am not sure why police numbers are an issue. In all three of the latest terrorist events they have performed commendably - particularly in the latest.
If there has been a failure it is in the security services who, it appears, had plenty of information on at least one of the latest 3 killers; and the budget for the security services has been massively increased over the last 10 years - including funding for another 2000 members in 2015.
If there has been a failure it is in the security services who, it appears, had plenty of information on at least one of the latest 3 killers; and the budget for the security services has been massively increased over the last 10 years - including funding for another 2000 members in 2015.
First neighbourhood officers supply intel and build relationships which can help uncover plots. Secondly the number of AFOs (firearms officers) is being increased but by 2018 we will still have fewer armed officers than we had in 2010, and no matter how capable they are they can't be in two places at once. In addition every new AFO means one less neighbourhood, traffic, response or CID officer as they can only perform one role at a time. Thirdly resilience. Many of the officers drafted in for security in Cardiff, Manchester and London came from other forces and had rest days cancelled or were put on longer shifts in order to provide back up. Their presence in other force areas also means that they would not be available for their own forces and their own roles. Fourthly reported crime is starting to creep up and we in the police have not started to get a grip on new forms of crime such as cyber crime. RTCs, violent and sexual offences are all increasing and whilst HMG may claim that this is to do with better reporting they have been claiming that for the last 3 or 4 years so those effects must be dropping out of the system. I think its as much to do with cuts to PC numbers as anything else as we have less people to provide a deterrent, fewer officers to respond to incidents and a lot less people to investigate an incident once it has happened. Lastly returning to AFOs, the majority of our resources are concentrated in London but as the Manchester attack showed the capital isn't the only city being targeted. I dread to think what would happen in my city if one of the large night clubs or sporting events was attacked at kicking out time, because I can't see anyway that we could get a concentrated armed response to deal with the attackers within 8 minutes.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skydiver
Like I say, we can't just magic 10's of 1000's of trained Professionals out of our ar$e............
The cracks are starting to show after years of non-investment and actual reductions in capability. By all Governments...not just the current one, or the one before that................
I, like you, do worry about our abilities to respond to an attack in anywhere outside of our major urban centres. Or worse still, a coordinated attack in more than one place at one time.
At least when the French get attacked they manage to flood the streets with Police and Army presence almost immediately. How effective it is I wonder, but at least Joe Public feels something is being done, and feels safer. I'm not sure we could do the same.........
That is all.
Arc
Like I say, we can't just magic 10's of 1000's of trained Professionals out of our ar$e............
The cracks are starting to show after years of non-investment and actual reductions in capability. By all Governments...not just the current one, or the one before that................
I, like you, do worry about our abilities to respond to an attack in anywhere outside of our major urban centres. Or worse still, a coordinated attack in more than one place at one time.
At least when the French get attacked they manage to flood the streets with Police and Army presence almost immediately. How effective it is I wonder, but at least Joe Public feels something is being done, and feels safer. I'm not sure we could do the same.........
That is all.
Arc
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
landslide starting to look unlikely......................
BBC website
Since she became Prime Minister, Theresa May has always enjoyed positive approval figures - more people have said that they are satisfied with her performance than dissatisfied. But in their
latest poll she has slumped to a negative overall figure of -7% (43% satisfied, 50% dissatisfied).
Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn's rating has shot up. He's still in negative territory and, on -11%, still behind Theresa May. But that contrasts with -41% in March, before the election was called.
Other pollsters have seen a similar trend. ComRes have also reported Theresa May's first negative negative rating (-3%). Opinium put Jeremy Corbyn on -12%, up from -35% at the start of the campaign. Theresa May has fallen to +6%.
BBC website
Since she became Prime Minister, Theresa May has always enjoyed positive approval figures - more people have said that they are satisfied with her performance than dissatisfied. But in their
latest poll she has slumped to a negative overall figure of -7% (43% satisfied, 50% dissatisfied).
Meanwhile, Jeremy Corbyn's rating has shot up. He's still in negative territory and, on -11%, still behind Theresa May. But that contrasts with -41% in March, before the election was called.
Other pollsters have seen a similar trend. ComRes have also reported Theresa May's first negative negative rating (-3%). Opinium put Jeremy Corbyn on -12%, up from -35% at the start of the campaign. Theresa May has fallen to +6%.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 59°09N 002°38W (IATA: SOY, ICAO: EGER)
Age: 80
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the real solution is a higher rate of income tax and a much better fiscal regime and oversight of how it's spent. That is far too radical and is the ultimate vote loser so will never happen. The reality is that the countries where there is a higher rate of tax have a higher standard of living (for example Finland, Sweden and Norway) - and we are not prepared to accept that level of taxation or commitment to society.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Electoral Calculus
This is interesting, they are currently sticking with a 72 seat tory majority, but if you scroll down you will see that they applaud the methodology used by YouGov in the recent hung parliament prediction.
Don't know about you lot, but imho all bets are off and I'll be staying up all night for the entertainment one way or the other.
PS
Interesting link Ricardian, thx for posting.
This is interesting, they are currently sticking with a 72 seat tory majority, but if you scroll down you will see that they applaud the methodology used by YouGov in the recent hung parliament prediction.
Don't know about you lot, but imho all bets are off and I'll be staying up all night for the entertainment one way or the other.
PS
Interesting link Ricardian, thx for posting.