Forces braced for more cuts .....
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I expect the DUP to vote with the Tories on the Queens Speech - to show them they can support them -
and then drop Teresa in it on some other legistlation - to show they still need bribing
And they'll do it for years............................
and then drop Teresa in it on some other legistlation - to show they still need bribing
And they'll do it for years............................
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Opportunity to get right back on thread
and now off thread...how does it sit with some of you, that an ex First Sea Lord is a JC supporter?
and on again...from his wiki page
Labour's Lord West of Spithead, the former First Sea Lord (2002-2006), says the UK's soft power is formidable but "it is nothing" if not backed by hard power - which he says has allowed us to punch above our weight for decades.
"It no longer does," he says; adding that the UK has ensured Europe's safety for 70 years "but is no longer able".
He says the government has given "comfortable words about defence" for many years but says this is "no longer good enough" and claims that UK forces are actually underfunded due to "incoherent cuts" to balance budgets.
Lord West says that military ships lack basic munitions, adding that this is "not an abstract issue". He says that world events could lead to a situation where we will have ships across the world that could face a fight, and where "we will have ships sunk and people will die".
It is a disgrace for our great maritime nation, he says, and warns it may affect our nation's survival.
"It no longer does," he says; adding that the UK has ensured Europe's safety for 70 years "but is no longer able".
He says the government has given "comfortable words about defence" for many years but says this is "no longer good enough" and claims that UK forces are actually underfunded due to "incoherent cuts" to balance budgets.
Lord West says that military ships lack basic munitions, adding that this is "not an abstract issue". He says that world events could lead to a situation where we will have ships across the world that could face a fight, and where "we will have ships sunk and people will die".
It is a disgrace for our great maritime nation, he says, and warns it may affect our nation's survival.
and on again...from his wiki page
In August 2016 he described the issues facing the MoD post-Brexit as a "perfect storm", insisting that there were great difficulties for the British military as a result of Britain's exit from the European Union.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...ader-peer-says
He said: “I had hoped that maybe he had the capacity to learn, to absorb things, in the nuclear argument, to hear all the debate, because it seems to me such a logical argument.
“I’m convinced we shouldn’t be unilateralist. I don’t think it achieves anything.
“It keeps us less safe. I think it’s a stupid thing to do. I’d hoped that he’d see that.
“But more and more I’m beginning to say, I don’t think he’s got the mental capacity to grasp some of these big issues.
“That’s a horrible thing to say but I don’t think he has.”
“I’m convinced we shouldn’t be unilateralist. I don’t think it achieves anything.
“It keeps us less safe. I think it’s a stupid thing to do. I’d hoped that he’d see that.
“But more and more I’m beginning to say, I don’t think he’s got the mental capacity to grasp some of these big issues.
“That’s a horrible thing to say but I don’t think he has.”
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aye, I kinda knew that, but I'm assuming (perhaps wrongly) that he is still of a "labour persuasion". More importantly it was written a year ago, when the power struggle in Labour was in full throttle.
That's all changed now.
In my book, since JC has cemented his grasp on the Labour Party, anybody who is a Labour supporter is defacto now a JC supporter, whether they like the dude and his politics or not.
Nothing wrong that, I might add, we live in a democracy. But the thrust of my question (which was unashamedly provocative) was since the primary dislike of JC amongst military and ex military people seems to be his past history with the IRA/ETA etc, how does it sit that one of us, has a big foot in his camp.
Or am I doing a disservice to the ex Admiral...perhaps he has disconnected himself from all things leftie and I'm just out of touch...would not be the first time
That's all changed now.
In my book, since JC has cemented his grasp on the Labour Party, anybody who is a Labour supporter is defacto now a JC supporter, whether they like the dude and his politics or not.
Nothing wrong that, I might add, we live in a democracy. But the thrust of my question (which was unashamedly provocative) was since the primary dislike of JC amongst military and ex military people seems to be his past history with the IRA/ETA etc, how does it sit that one of us, has a big foot in his camp.
Or am I doing a disservice to the ex Admiral...perhaps he has disconnected himself from all things leftie and I'm just out of touch...would not be the first time
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's now ahead of the Maybot as best person to be PM according to the Times poll today
And, TBh, it's getting hard to disagree
She needs to go before she becomes total laughing stock
And, TBh, it's getting hard to disagree
She needs to go before she becomes total laughing stock
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Didn't we just have an election?"
Indeed - and Mrs May survives on sufferance as she blew it
If tgeh Tories weren't running scared she'd have been out on her ear the day after and we'd have a full scale intra - Tory battle on to choose her replacement
Indeed - and Mrs May survives on sufferance as she blew it
If tgeh Tories weren't running scared she'd have been out on her ear the day after and we'd have a full scale intra - Tory battle on to choose her replacement
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Corbyn will still have lost the election, it's past time that people got over it. Staying on track, I don't see any way that Corbyn will become a Forces favourite, his record of support for the military is dire and service personnel are generally too cynical to be bought with free sweeties like the students.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those with an interest, here are two interesting links I have dug out...both of which tell a similar story, to whit...
https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...lCIaAnIP8P8HAQ
How the queen?s speech could bring down Theresa May ? POLITICO
If the Queens Speech is voted down, it would be constitutionally problematic for the tories & May to continue (using the last occasion 1924 as a "recent" precedent). However, the introduction of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has introduced the possibility of a constitutional impasse, and as yet, the specific circumstances we face are untested, ie we are potentially in unknown territory.
All this is of course moot if the Queens Speech passes, as it looks likely to do. But it is worth noting that the expression "likely to do", along with the projections of political analysts, has come to mean absolutely FA over the last two years. There are a lot of angry politcos knocking about just now, and it will only take a few tories to say, "you know what, f**k this grubby power grab & brexit ****, not what my constituents elected me for, I'm out".
So who knows. It's flippin hard to even find out when the vote is...Thursday seems favourite.
Here's my odds
5/1 against Queens Speech voted down, constitutional row...another General Election in 3 months or less.
4/5 on Queens Speech squeaks thru'. TM continues for a while, its all about Brexit for two years, near to zero non-brexit related domestic legislative agenda.
Either way, decisions on defence spending will be non-existent at parliamentary level for the next two years plus, so just existing budget management by the MOD for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see how the MOD managers spin out a budget that is probably insufficient to meet their forthcoming needs.
True, and other than ideologically blind Labour supporters nobody disputes that. But winning the most seats/votes does not necessarily inevitably lead to forming a government and there are plenty of historical precedents, home and abroad, to inform us thus.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...lCIaAnIP8P8HAQ
How the queen?s speech could bring down Theresa May ? POLITICO
If the Queens Speech is voted down, it would be constitutionally problematic for the tories & May to continue (using the last occasion 1924 as a "recent" precedent). However, the introduction of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act has introduced the possibility of a constitutional impasse, and as yet, the specific circumstances we face are untested, ie we are potentially in unknown territory.
All this is of course moot if the Queens Speech passes, as it looks likely to do. But it is worth noting that the expression "likely to do", along with the projections of political analysts, has come to mean absolutely FA over the last two years. There are a lot of angry politcos knocking about just now, and it will only take a few tories to say, "you know what, f**k this grubby power grab & brexit ****, not what my constituents elected me for, I'm out".
So who knows. It's flippin hard to even find out when the vote is...Thursday seems favourite.
Here's my odds
5/1 against Queens Speech voted down, constitutional row...another General Election in 3 months or less.
4/5 on Queens Speech squeaks thru'. TM continues for a while, its all about Brexit for two years, near to zero non-brexit related domestic legislative agenda.
Either way, decisions on defence spending will be non-existent at parliamentary level for the next two years plus, so just existing budget management by the MOD for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see how the MOD managers spin out a budget that is probably insufficient to meet their forthcoming needs.
And Corbyn will still have lost the election, it's past time that people got over it.
Last edited by The Old Fat One; 27th Jun 2017 at 07:58.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If "grubby power-grab" it is, you've just described the governments of most of Europe. Even allowing for unpredictability, are you really saying some Tory MP's (or anyone) would facilitate a much grubbier power-grab by brexit supporting Labour? Even if they did, they'd need support of SNP (indyref 2 wa hae!) AND lib-dem AND DUP AND everyone else and even then they wouldn't have a majority. If you think there's a funding crisis now, how much would be left for defence after all the bungs and bribes needed to hold that lot together?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RUSI and the £20 billion black hole...
Some interesting views from RUSI...
https://rusi.org/commentary/ministry...s#.WVlYxShHE0c
Such as:
Enjoy...
https://rusi.org/commentary/ministry...s#.WVlYxShHE0c
Such as:
- Merge 3 Cdo and 16 AA Bde into 1 x spearhead Bde
- A reduced Lightning II fleet to be flown by the FAA (only), supported by RAF Infra
- Uplift Typhoon to enable the RAF to transition to an unmanned combat fleet over the next 30 years
Enjoy...
So, the black hole is down from £38Bn to £20Bn in just a few years. No better indication of the cuts; and now more planned before assessing the impact of the previous ones. Or was the £38Bn a load of cobblers to justify cuts? Or is this now Treasury BCs saying, you managed £18BN, now take more. Time for the Chiefs of Staff to speak out while in office.
3 Cdo might twitch as this would be seen as an opportunity to consolidate the recently announced cuts in their strength - and some more. Parts of the Army would be glad to get shot of 16AAB, at least the ground element. I recall them being written out of BOWMAN, senior staff alleging they weren't a properly established unit. By the time they produced their chit it was too late. Interesting and revealing little Army spat. Makes you wonder who's whispering in RUSI ears.
3 Cdo might twitch as this would be seen as an opportunity to consolidate the recently announced cuts in their strength - and some more. Parts of the Army would be glad to get shot of 16AAB, at least the ground element. I recall them being written out of BOWMAN, senior staff alleging they weren't a properly established unit. By the time they produced their chit it was too late. Interesting and revealing little Army spat. Makes you wonder who's whispering in RUSI ears.
RUSI- what a strange abbreviation. What a load of tosh! If Steve Hillier is a "man of vision" he should be pushing for the whole carrier farce to be drawn to a close. I have a vision, and it is not good: The really useful defensive and retaliatory modern capabilities that UK Armed Forces need, will be (further) pared back below levels necessary for the effective support of national responsibilities. The carrier farce will neuter the capabilities that are actually important.
BTW, did you realise, the carrier farce is probably the reason for the 1% Military pay freeze!
OAP
BTW, did you realise, the carrier farce is probably the reason for the 1% Military pay freeze!
OAP
Not good with numbers are you fella?
Aside from the small fact that Equipment comes out of a different budget to pay - which might seem trivial when on a hobby-horse, but is actually important - you really ought to try comparing programme budgets and their annual impact. Here's a thought - did you know that the in-year spend for QE and F35 was no more than that for A400M & FSTA in 2015-2016 (last year that NAO published its very useful project appendices)? Or that more was spent on Typhoon (even then) than QE?
Some percentages for you :
% of in-yr EP budget (2015/16)
Typhoon 17%
QE 13%
A400 12%
Astute 12%
FSTA 9%
F35 6%
Complex weaps 5%
You might also find that QE ain't even in the top four most expensive programmes in the EP. Look elsewhere for your pay limit, but don't let that get in the way of a good tantrum eh?
Not good with numbers are you fella?
Some percentages for you :
% of in-yr EP budget (2015/16)
Typhoon 17%
QE 13%
A400 12%
Astute 12%
FSTA 9%
F35 6%
Complex weaps 5%
You might also find that QE ain't even in the top four most expensive programmes in the EP. Look elsewhere for your pay limit, but don't let that get in the way of a good tantrum eh?
Some percentages for you :
% of in-yr EP budget (2015/16)
Typhoon 17%
QE 13%
A400 12%
Astute 12%
FSTA 9%
F35 6%
Complex weaps 5%
You might also find that QE ain't even in the top four most expensive programmes in the EP. Look elsewhere for your pay limit, but don't let that get in the way of a good tantrum eh?
OAP
Well if you're going to take it like that.....
There is a difference between what the Joint Capabilities Board and its predecessors, HMG and our closest allies think is needed and what an embittered former pilot with a tenuous grasp of facts thinks is needed.
One tends to have rather more weight than the other......