UK Strategic Defence Review 2020 - get your bids in now ladies & gents
Sigh.....
The Chancellor is appointed by, and works for, the PRIME Minister. The incumbent Chancellors job, as for the rest of the Cabinet, is to deliver policy as laid down by the PRIME Minister based on the manifesto. They are not independent post holders with their own ideas, policies, plans and agendas.
Some people need to remember the other title on No. 10 Downing Street, and the PM's additional title; FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY.
The Chancellor is appointed by, and works for, the PRIME Minister. The incumbent Chancellors job, as for the rest of the Cabinet, is to deliver policy as laid down by the PRIME Minister based on the manifesto. They are not independent post holders with their own ideas, policies, plans and agendas.
Some people need to remember the other title on No. 10 Downing Street, and the PM's additional title; FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY.
(Tumbleweed).
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, my mistake on the numbers.
£3bn a year vs £1.9bn for one year....
The latter serves no purpose in the post-Brexit climate.
If only there wasn't an economic crisis....
£3bn a year vs £1.9bn for one year....
The latter serves no purpose in the post-Brexit climate.
If only there wasn't an economic crisis....
Sigh..... The Chancellor is appointed by, and works for, the PRIME Minister. The incumbent Chancellors job, as for the rest of the Cabinet, is to deliver policy as laid down by the PRIME Minister based on the manifesto. They are not independent post holders with their own ideas, policies, plans and agendas. ........
Or maybe I'm just a cynic.........!
An increase of £1.9b "serves no purpose?"
What!!!!
Are you real, with people blathering on about defence CUTS you blithely dismiss a £1.9b increase?
Hot 'n' High,
If you want a chillingly accurate portrayal of UK politics take a look at "The thick of it" TV series or spin offs rather that a quaint 40 year old BBC sitcom.
No manifesto is chucked aside with such a cavalier attitude as you suggest, unless you are a Lib Dem and ylou are talking tuition fees...
If you want a chillingly accurate portrayal of UK politics take a look at "The thick of it" TV series or spin offs rather that a quaint 40 year old BBC sitcom.
No manifesto is chucked aside with such a cavalier attitude as you suggest, unless you are a Lib Dem and ylou are talking tuition fees...
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over one single year, it isn't going to address the issue, is it?
If anything, it's going to harm defence because it will be a cut to the following year's budget. One step forward, one back - that's not progress, and certainly won't achieve the vision of a "global Britain," as the Prime Minister has repeatedly alluded to.
It's pretty terrible.
Thread Starter
The problem is that the Ministry of Defence is facing a black hole of £13 billion in its ten-year budget for equipment. If you kick in £ 1.9 Bn extra for one year most of it will go to fill the hole - or if it is spent on new kit the hole only gets bigger (and that has been the pattern since 1945).
Since the MoD are incapable of costing things properly we finish up with something BIG having to be sacrificed or alternatively just let everything slowly bleed down
|The alternative, to ring fence cash from a tax raise, is politically not on the table even in good times
Since the MoD are incapable of costing things properly we finish up with something BIG having to be sacrificed or alternatively just let everything slowly bleed down
|The alternative, to ring fence cash from a tax raise, is politically not on the table even in good times
However, the track record of Manifesto's being achieved is patchy, often due to changing circumstances such as 2008 or Covid. On a good day, many a manifesto relies on a dose of good fortune as the "affordability" of such plans is often debatable - much like
This Thread started on 2nd Dec last year. Many of us "rolled eyes" having seen endless "brave new worlds" all of which have crashed or, rather, fizzled out. Today, the whole game has changed significantly. We have, on the last couple of pages, been discussing how to minimise the long term impact of the current Covid borrowing. Any Review now has Covid repayments to factor in when it comes to "affordability". As Marly Lite said at post #475, "Dont worry, YOU (and I) will pay for it in taxes and inflation. For the rest of our lives."! One of my kids is on furlough - oblivious as to what this is lining her and her generation up for long after H 'n' H has checked out from "life".
Interesting times ...... and a whole new slant to the title of this Thread - ".....get your bids in now ladies & gents" - we could add "... now the limited pie is about to be slashed further!". The Economy over the next few years has just become even more unpredictable, hence the one-year settlement being mooted.
pr00ne,
From all I'm given to understand, not what I actually know of course, there was considerable disagreement between Blair and Brown concerning a couple of policy decisions, one was whether or not to take us into the Euro, Blair wanted in, Brown out, for fiscal reasons indeed. Then there was the interventionist nature of Blair and his seeming obsession with standing by Bush Jnr every step of the way, hence Gulf War 2. Brown was very much a reluctant participant and didn't/couldn't/wouldn't find the funding for the Defence Budget which the Defence Chiefs believed was necessary to maintain all the overseas campaigns and maintain the kind of projected peacetime defence posture, determined through SDR '98, outside of this. The result was very much the outcome of Hoon's "Delivering Security in an ever changing World" (I hope I've got the title right) review in 2004. Hope this post doesn't place me below the bar of that expected of a "professional" contributant.
FB
From all I'm given to understand, not what I actually know of course, there was considerable disagreement between Blair and Brown concerning a couple of policy decisions, one was whether or not to take us into the Euro, Blair wanted in, Brown out, for fiscal reasons indeed. Then there was the interventionist nature of Blair and his seeming obsession with standing by Bush Jnr every step of the way, hence Gulf War 2. Brown was very much a reluctant participant and didn't/couldn't/wouldn't find the funding for the Defence Budget which the Defence Chiefs believed was necessary to maintain all the overseas campaigns and maintain the kind of projected peacetime defence posture, determined through SDR '98, outside of this. The result was very much the outcome of Hoon's "Delivering Security in an ever changing World" (I hope I've got the title right) review in 2004. Hope this post doesn't place me below the bar of that expected of a "professional" contributant.
FB
Sadly there is no strategy at all today, because the UK government has not decided where to go.
A Euro centric focus would be mostly business as usual, deter the Russians somewhere, maybe along the Eastern Polish Frontier, tanks, strike aircraft and air to air supremacy.
An independent stance would be totally different, lots of territorial control assets, mostly offshore oriented, a modest nuclear deterrent and a fairly robust SAS style intervention force.
Has anyone articulated the basis for the current 'strategic review'?
A Euro centric focus would be mostly business as usual, deter the Russians somewhere, maybe along the Eastern Polish Frontier, tanks, strike aircraft and air to air supremacy.
An independent stance would be totally different, lots of territorial control assets, mostly offshore oriented, a modest nuclear deterrent and a fairly robust SAS style intervention force.
Has anyone articulated the basis for the current 'strategic review'?
Sadly there is no strategy at all today, because the UK government has not decided where to go.
A Euro centric focus would be mostly business as usual, deter the Russians somewhere, maybe along the Eastern Polish Frontier, tanks, strike aircraft and air to air supremacy.
An independent stance would be totally different, lots of territorial control assets, mostly offshore oriented, a modest nuclear deterrent and a fairly robust SAS style intervention force.
Has anyone articulated the basis for the current 'strategic review'?
A Euro centric focus would be mostly business as usual, deter the Russians somewhere, maybe along the Eastern Polish Frontier, tanks, strike aircraft and air to air supremacy.
An independent stance would be totally different, lots of territorial control assets, mostly offshore oriented, a modest nuclear deterrent and a fairly robust SAS style intervention force.
Has anyone articulated the basis for the current 'strategic review'?
FB
Thread Starter
Cummings to be gone by Christmas according to the BBC - you can hear the sigh of relief though the Industrial/Military Complex.............
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Cummings to be gone by Christmas according to the BBC - you can hear the sigh of relief though the Industrial/Military Complex.............
Guido Fawkes:
...”There are now rumours Cummings may leave Downing Street in January only to oversee Britain’s DARPA, Dom’s Advanced Research Projects Agency, where he would hot desk out of the Cabinet Office while working on pet projects.
His WhatsApp profile bio lists his priorities as “GetBrexitDoneThenARPA” – referencing the Advanced Research Projects Agency set up by the US in 1958 that has had mixed results.
Coincidentally, Sunak announced £800 million for such a “blue skies thinking agency” back in March…”
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope not.
At least, not until he has royally stuffed the institutional cronyism within the Armed Forces and MOD which favours promotion by boot licking, rather than performance and time served...
The government and senior leaders require subordinates who are willing to speak "truth to power" without fear of consequences affecting their career progression. Total accountability is impossible without this, because 'yes men' will say whatever is needed for a good report and it's not necessarily in the interests of protecting the country. Just look at the recent history with regards to Labour's extreme, overly ambitious spending plans in defence, which really hurt the military after the review in 2010 when it was realised that our economy couldn't sustain it. Speaking out against it would have been career damaging.... on both occasions.
The history books have documented a lot of this and it's rather sad.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Already gone.....
Breaking News:
PM adviser Dominic Cummings has left Number 10 with immediate effect, BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg says.
Mr Cummings spoke to the PM earlier on Friday and it was decided it was best for him to go immediately after days of turmoil, our political editor said.
The PM's director of communications Lee Cain has also left.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54938050
Breaking News:
PM adviser Dominic Cummings has left Number 10 with immediate effect, BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg says.
Mr Cummings spoke to the PM earlier on Friday and it was decided it was best for him to go immediately after days of turmoil, our political editor said.
The PM's director of communications Lee Cain has also left.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54938050
I wonder what Cummings departure will mean for the supposedly already thrashed out Foreign, Defence and Security review? I was speaking to a mate this morning who reckoned, Lee Cain, an ally of Cummings, a former Daily Mirror reporter or some such position, apart from dressing up as a Chicken and mocking Tory MPs, was actively engaged, with Cummings in discrediting the Prime Minister. Taking all this into account, how the hell was it thought prudent to hire either of them in the first place. But my mate believes, that the pair worked very hard to wrong foot Johnson, and it worked. Hopefully now, Boris can get back on an even Kiel.
FB
FB
Thread Starter
" was actively engaged, with Cummings in discrediting the Prime Minister."
That's unlikely - they owed their whole promotion & position to him. Its a classic faction fight between two groups for the ear of a weak and indecisive man - check out Barchester Towers - or remember the question asked in 1912 of a very senior Tsarist Minister "Who is the most important man in Russia?" "Simple - the last man the Tsar talked to"
That's unlikely - they owed their whole promotion & position to him. Its a classic faction fight between two groups for the ear of a weak and indecisive man - check out Barchester Towers - or remember the question asked in 1912 of a very senior Tsarist Minister "Who is the most important man in Russia?" "Simple - the last man the Tsar talked to"