The Defense Budget - What would you do?
 

There is no doubt that the MoD is in both short and long term financial dire straits.

Would you be willing to take one for the team in the form of a 5% pay cut now to help fill the delta? This would be subject to a once only rebalance, across the board, with future pay rises (increments and AFPRB) unaffacted - ie you get your pay rise, but it would be a rise against the 5% lower level.

I would. I think that if we, corporately could make the offer it would demonstrate to the public the importance we all attach to maintaining our capability and our belief of how damaging cuts at this particular juncture would be. It would generate debate, push defense spending to the forefront of the public's mindset and give the people with defense a justifiable ownership of our future equipment programme.

As a second question, does anybody working in the area know what the saving would be - in total for defence and for the three individual commands?

Of note an interesting point on QT last night - Every penny of income tax is spent on the welfare system. Everything else is funded from indirect taxation. Perhaps all welfare payments should be cut by 5% aswell!

I wonder what effect a hold on promotions for 5 years would have on the MOD's wages budget. We could afford to 'lose' a fairly large chunk of Wg Cdr (and upwards) bods from the RAF too.

The rank structure of the RAF could be changed.

Maybe (Hahaha) a Flight Commander could be a Flt Lt instead of a Sqn Ldr
or a Squadron Commander could be a Sqn Ldr instead of a Wg Cdr
There could be Group Captains in charge of Groups instead of Air Commodores.:p

Close bases in the south of the UK where the real workers of the RAF cannot afford a house, and rebuild/reopen bases in the North, and then apply a windfall tax on Annington Homes for the southern MQs.

And Finally to save the biggest amount of money:

The nearest Service establishment to the Houses of Parliament should have a large Premier Inn style block built with 635 rooms. (better still let the MPs live in NORMAL barrack accomodation - then they can live the same way as living-in Service Personnel) All MPs can stay there, and all second homes allowances can be scrapped. No need to pay them extra £400/month for food, as they will be able to get 'home' for food.

Would I be willing? No, not really. Pay cuts and freezes only work in the private sector when a companies future is potentialy at stake. This is because ultimatimtely all private sector companies are profit making organisations. Loosing 5% of your pay is better than loosing your job.

Here in the public sector, we are paid from the defence budget. The best you could hope for is that the money you donate back would be spent on something useful. I can't say I approve of this though, as it would be tantamount to making guys buy their own ammunition on ops, or fuel, or food, or body armour.

More likely however is that the cash would ultimately end up being wasted away trying to make DIIII work, or auditing travel claims. I get paid less than my civilian counterpart already, I can't see that widening that gap would aid retention much.

So essentialy........No. But maybe I'm just jack:cool:

Do you propose this for ranks in the higher earning bracket? Or for all ranks? I can't see it going down very well with a Cpl with 2 children in married quarters, yet alone one with a mortgage.

What - you mean......the flying world is out of kilter with the blunties who have flt lts, sqn ldrs and wg cdrs commanding flts, sqns and wgs? Quick - someone tell the senior management - they will change things!

:rolleyes:

Have been watching Wimbledon and there seem to be an awful lot of uniforms hanging about. Coldstream Guards just signed a One Million pound recording contract. Hundreds of service personnel on Public Duties.
Maybe a reassessment of the priorities would not go amiss. Bit hard to convince the public we are hurting when stuff like the above goes on and men and women are losing their jobs and homes every day.
The 'Publicity' argument no longer washes I am afraid. With the recession, the CIOs are bulging at the seams.
I know I will get shot down in flames but it is about time we thought long and hard about the bells and whistles activities.

If not, we are ripe for plucking and 'totally plucked' we will be!

Mr Hinecap.

I think the Blunty jibes should be left back in the Cold War, don't you? There are far more people out on the ground in The Stan putting their lives on the line at the moment, so your purile sense of self worth is a little out of place.:mad:

I like Bluntie jibes.

Mod Budget - What's To Be Done?
 

I am ex RAF and joined up in 1979 during Maggie's tenure as PM. Then the RAF was c. 117,000 (not sure of the exact no but its close enough). I left in the post Cold War options for change in 1989 and have few regrets...:ok:

Even back then there were Defence Cuts. Remember John Nott? Then came the Falklands War. Suddenly the Forces were needed and to be fair, losses and attrition in that war were made good, something that can't be said today :=.

Then came the end of the Cold War and the toppling of the Berlin Wall and this was an excuse for further cuts in the so-called "options for change" review. I recall this being sold to us on the basis of "more teeth and less tail". Then came Croatia, Bosnia, Balkans Ops and the first war that NATO got involved with in Europe. The world suddenly seemed a less stable place to be.

This then is followed by GW1, GW2 and now Afganistan. Where next? Korea, Iran, Pakistan? There's still a lot of "un-finished business" and the withdrawal from Iraq and the peace in Northern Ireland doesn't take away the need for substantial armed forces in the future if we as a country wish to exert ANY influence on the world stage. We need to be credable in forums such as the UN (esp as a permanent member of the security council), NATO, the G8 etc. etc.

The bottom line is we in the armed forces don't set the agenda. Our political masters decide where they want (need) us but don't ever give us either the right tools or sufficient quantity to get the job done properly. It is a case of "more butter or less bread" and I suspect again it will be neither.:ugh:

Politically it would be suicidal for us to pull out of AFG and allow Al Quaida to re-group and then mount attacks against Western interests on our "home" soil - what would happen to Pak and how would that threaten India? India is important economically (almost as much as China) to the world and what would that do to future world trade?

We are now spending c. 2.5% of GDP on the defence and protection of this country at a time when the external threats we face are real and unlikely to go away. I'm not necessarily meaning a State-on-State conflict but more of the kind we faced in Malaya in the 1950's when counter-insurgency was first encountered. The big problem is a weak political leadership, unwilling to heed the advice of its military advisors, and a Treasury which interferes with "bean counters" dictating policies not just within the MOD but also within the NHS, Education etc. etc.

The £1BN extra cost for the "future carrier" project is largely due to delays to the original procurement schedule and not due to the contractor.

The real question is that 2.5% of GDP is not a realistic figure to fund the armed forces if we are to have Trident, be able to mount "expeditionary" warefare ops, and conduct a war in AFG 3,000 miles from home. Either we, as a country accept a "border protection force" as being the limits of our global presence (or should I say pretence?) OR we agree to fund the armed forces with say 4-5% of GDP and do so on a long-term basis.

4-5% I would argue is both sustainable and appropriate. We waste too much money on things like the Millennium Dome, 2012 Olympics and MP's expenses! That said, MOD procurement needs to sharpen up to cut the waste on Nimrod, A400M etc. But these cost over-runs are perhaps inevitable if the original design criteria is cost and not based on a performance spec. Also, we lose all ecoomies of scale if we don't stick to the original numbers. 6 T45's instead of 12. 12 MR4's instead of 18 etc. We were able to fund the armed forces at this level even in the "austere" post-war period in the 1950's (remember Suez?) what's so different today?

What really irks me now is that even combat losses are not being made up with attrition orders for aircraft that have been lost on ops coupled with the removal (prematurely) of other much-valued assets which had been bought and paid for and still useful in the ORBAT. (Jaguar, Sea Harrier).

Part of the blame though does however rest with out own Service "top brass". A collective protest or notice to offer their resignations, unless resources match the "ask", would get a lot of attention and gain serious respect from their troops. Bring back military hospitals, stop base closures (Lyneham, Coltishall, Scampton, St. Mawgan.......)

Rant over.....MB out!

What would I do
 

Its very easy to argue amongst ourselves about what we should cut but if you put us alongside other Government departments I think there is a case that the pain should lie elsewhere.

At the risk of sounding like a Daily Mail reader, if you really want to save serious cash here are my big five:

1. Get a grip of Social Security. I have every sympathy for those who want to work or have recently lost their jobs. However, there are many who have been brought up with the belief that you get something for nothing. Also, look at the sacred cows - should everyone get universal Child Benefit? In short, the Social Security system should be a safety net only because whether we like it or not, we cannot afford it.

2. Get a grip of the compensation culture and rebalance risk adversion. At the very least, put a cap on compensation and stop the ludicrous payouts in all but very specific circumstances. Am I the only one who thinks that it is the Lawyers who need to take a good look at themselves?

3. Admit the pension timebomb. Raise the state pension age and let people work longer if they want. Undo the pension tax on dividend payments that has destroyed what was an excellent private pension system. Make saving for retirement compulsory and a proportion of income.

4. As for the armed forces. Decide whether we are a global player, a contributor to coalition efforts or a simple home defence force and resource appropriately. If they want us to carry on as a global player then we need more money. In which case, stop arguing amongst ourselves and start fighting our corner.

5. Get rid of JPA. If only for the reason that noone else has said it as yet and I wanted to be the first.

Overall, I understand the sentiment behind taking a pay cut but I despair where that money would subsequently go.

Oh damn, I did sound like a Daily Mail reader didn't I?

Could be worse, you could sound like a grauniad reader.

Wyler
 

;)

Have been watching Wimbledon and there seem to be an awful lot of uniforms hanging about. Coldstream Guards just signed a One Million pound recording contract. Hundreds of service personnel on Public Duties.

They are all on leave. The perk is to watch tennis.

Er, no. The perk is to meet attractive young ladies and get to know them "better"...:}

Bin Trident.

Too much money to replace a system we're never going to use. With more effective MOABs / cruise missiles, there is no justifictation for an un-targetted weapon that produces fallout over civilian poputations, both friendly and enemy.

I bet Bin Laden is quaking with fear that we would consider renewing Trident...

Also - chop DPA in its entirety, and restart procurement on the basis not of buying small amounts of do-it-all kit, but greater volumes of specialised, more cost effective kit (A330M should have been split as a dedicated tanker fleet and a dedicated transport fleet to minimise the costs involved):

- Eliminate most upper ranks in the RAF such that the size and structure is supportive of the assets operated
- Civilianise and outsource non-base admin functions
- Cancel A400M and buy 30 C17s now
- Buy transport-only aircraft off the shelf (A350s / 777s), maintained by BA/Virgin
- Buy more UAVs and integrate with JSF/Typhoon
- Re-establish NCO flight crew
- Cancel Nimrod and buy Poseidon...(bit late really now though)
- Ensure bases remain - it may be cheaper to "consolidate", but the flexibility is paramount
- Sort out the waste that is Annington Homes

I am of the non-flying bretheren. I am on the ground. Flying is something the handsome wee boys in their romper suits do. I am a Loggie. I am 'blunt'.

I was making a slightly tongue-in-cheek point that the non-flying world does things differently to the two-winged master race. I am sorry that my irony was, to you, just another metal, like coppery.

Self jibeing blunties!! Whatever next?

22/7,

Whilst your profile claims to be 2 miles away from Wreford's, are you actually in the UK military because Defence is spelt that way, not Defense.

Are you a Troll?? Explain yourself YANK!
:=

Who the f*&k is Bin Trident? I thought the bloke was called Bin Laden!???

I can't keep up here, more Bins than a council estate.

Look through the other end of the telescope.

Joe Bloggs is a university student or unemployed and is a debt on the nation.
Tommy Atkins OTOH is not on the dole and although also a debt on the nation you may deduct his notional dole money, income tax and national insurance, and his other indirect taxes. The balance is therefore either neutral or a credit.

At the other end of the scale, your wg cdr would either be working and contributing the same as Tommy Atkins or retired with a big bucket of money and a substantial pension. One is a credit and the other a straight debit albeit with some taxes paid.

Either way, in the overall scheme of things, an employed serviceman is cheaper for the economy than a redundant one who still costs big bucks but is no longer productive.

But a capitalist society works by recycling the unemployed Wg Cmdr in a new role, either as an entrepreneur or new employee.

As a year 1 economics student would tell you, the size of the cake is not fixed!

Defence Budget
 

Pedant I may be, but I prefer "Defence" with a "c"!

That's as maybe, unless the wg cdr upsticks to Spain or Oz or whereever or decides his pension is big enough. Sometimes it is a double hit as Mrs Wg Cdr retires when he does too.

PS,

and I wouldn't trust any first year student to even buy a postage stamp on time.

If UK PLC was at war and the nation's survival depended on it then yes. Since it's not, the answer is no I would not accept a 5% pay cut.

On a personal level with kids and a mortgage it would hit me quite hard. But the main reason is that whilst 22/7M's intentions are admirable, the basic plan is crap.

I doubt it would save that much money in the grand scheme of things and it would just enhance the push factor when the economy eventually, but inevitably picks up. Furthermore, moral would go even further south than it is now.

Notwithstanding the problems with the UK's Social Security policy, the crux of the problem (as has been eluded to already) is the mismatch between the government's desire for us to be a world military power and the amount they're willing to spend.

Leave Afghanistan to the Americans.

Some of those staples sharp are they?

What are these death defying acts you deliver on det then?

Stump up or shut up!

PN said some good stuff ending with:

National service? Probably not.

Pay cut? Emphatically no! What value judgement does that imply when people are in harm's way, fighting and dying?

Cancel Trident.

CG

"Defense" budget?
"Help fill the delta"?????

I would sack any senior officer who fails to use the English language proper-like :E

If Frank Field and Greg Pope manage to get Broon's decision to scrap the 10p bottom rate of income tax revisited next week, even more cuts are going to have to be made.

PS: Brewers, saving for retirement is going to become compulsary in 3 years or so. And if public service final salary schemes are still around in 5, I'll be gobsmacked.

Cut massive swathes of admin & bureacracy out of the MoD in all areas
Contractorise even more functions but streamline the bidding process
Reduce the number of Senior Officers in all 3 Services massively - the "pyramid" needs to be flatter & the reporting/ admin structure really needs to be examined to see where it is adding value & where it is adding "nausea"
Combine Commands/ Functions (eg CAS & CinCStrike, 1SL & CinCFleet etc)
Bring the Army back from Germany so that they can spend their money in the UK
Must be some more Airbases that can close (unless they are needed to house the Army returning from Germany)
Close BRNC Dartmouth & conduct initial Naval Officer training either at HMS Raleigh or in a joint service estlishment with professional training at HMS Collingwood (eventually Collingwood would have to close, too, & move its functions to Raleigh)
Close Portsmouth Naval Base & shift all RN ships to Devonport (pity they have just announced the opposite move for FF/DDs)


& that's just off the top off my head & there's plenty that will disagree with me, I'm sure. Trouble is that there would be even more in-fighting between the Services & within each Service than hitherto and, most importantly, the changes would all COST money & require investment to bring to fruition. Even if they were considered to be good ideas the Politicians would just think in the short term.

Chop CEA.
Reduce specialist pay by 50%

As we were saying at lunch (a little liquid)...

Let's just bin the whole bally lot. Scrub the single services completely and have a single defence force. Centralise all the support functions, think of all that money saved. And no more single service chiefs bickering. All one uniform, so we can keep the costs of kit down, joint training regimes wherever possible then specialise on sea, land or air. Build super-bases across the country (it's happening anyway with Devonport becoming a ghost town (if FOST moves it'll be goodnight Guz)). Give SAR to the Coastguard, too.

Like I say, it was a bit liquid and we did work this up on the back of a fag packet. A bit like the last budget, really :}

Andyy, Andyy, Andyy, Beatriz, Beatriz, Beatriz,

I really do not mean to be rude but, I have had two pints of Bulmers. You really should think a bit more carefully before posting such uninformed and naive drivel. I think you should both stick to Rum Ration.

Sorry, don't mean to be rude but do you expect those posts to be taken seriously?

Ah Widger, you have spotted the irony in my posting. And no, I don't expect anyone to take it seriously. That was why it was written in the style that it was.

Have another apple juice and lighten up.

Glug Glug, light is on, what's the weather like in Lee tonight?:ok::ok::ok:

Without Trident you get 15 billion quid to spend between the forces.

5bn each (apologies to Royal Marines).

You have to stretch it out over 20 years - but what would you buy? And if he RAF doesn't say helicopters and transport aircraft or mentions fighters then ban them from the thread..

A shed load of Mastiff/Panther/Husky/.50cal/Boots/Aircon/viable comms kit would be my vote but I know nothing and have no vote.


WWW

It's been done; The project managers who get vilified in the press and elsewhere for equipment delays do their own recruiting, promoting of staff, special leave and training authorisation and welfare follow-up thereby saving the taxpayer the cost of, mostly, junior grade staff. The pay admin element is contracted out to PPPA. Streamlining of commercial functions is only possible when Treasury and EU say so.

Kinloss? Plenty of real estate at Waddington to accomodate just 9 MRA4s.

Leuchars/Lossie? Shut one or the other, scrap the GR4 (F3s are gone soon anyway) and embrace the future that is Typhoon. Walk away from JCA/JSF (which is it?) and have a maritime version of Typhoon instead. Close both stations and have carriers instead. One can moor in the Moray Firth while the other goes on a world cruise, then they swap over.:E

If technical training is to be centralised do it at an existing site rather than move it to somewhere the current instructor cadre don't want to go, that is miles from the motorway and isn't in a central location.

That's my two penn'orth. SWs to you all.

R

RAF should buy gripen,

no reason really, i just think she looks sweet.:ok:

Now is the time to announce future asset sales - don't sell them now but give a notional date when we think the recession will be over when we intend to flog them.

The biggest asset sale currently planned is Ofcom's statement in Jan 08 that they intend to flog off a big chunk of Govt-controlled radio spectrum, 75% of which is allocated to MoD. Back then they said this could raise between £3bn and £20bn. All you need to do is cite the precedent of the sale of Chelsea Barracks (when all £950m of the proceeds went back to MoD) and Bob's your uncle.

Next on the list is Wellington and Hyde Park Barracks. Lovely central London locations and as far as I can see of no value in the defence of the realm.

Then as someone else mentioned moving bases to the North would save money - there's an entire episode of Yes Minister devoted to this proposal. Of course if there is evidence that these moves would significantly worsen retention rates in key trades then perhaps not.

Sadly my understanding re the bases in Germany is that we requisitioned all of the sites in 1945 and therefore if and when we hand them back we won't get a penny.

In PMQs today the PM was asked by a Scottish MP if the 3rd Aircraft carrier would be built, he confirmed that it would be.:rolleyes:

Will the UK be able to afford to put any aircraft on these carriers?:confused: