We're Extremely Taut !
 

Probably the understatement of the year !

Defence Secretary

High speed manoeuvring afoot :suspect:

No doubt that'll mean a ministerial reshuffle in the next few days.....:hmm:

£22M divided by 140,000? That would give us each an extra £157 per year...nope we need to find more savings than just Seedcorn to give a decent pay increase or cease redundancies.

LJ

....but if the seedcorn budget is being paid for by the RAF then surely you should be dividing by about 35,000, giving a pay rise of about £600 each - which is probably more than most people will get in April with the expected 1% pay rise!

Quote:

---

We're Extremely Taugt !

---

Extremely poorly taught it seems.

Conservative MP Patrick Mercer said Mr Hammond's comments were "a warning shot across Treasury boughs and Lib Dem boughs".

Their spelin/grammar is worse than mine.

I do wonder in the term Bow ( the front of a boat) did come from "Bough" the bit of a tree where the big branches separate from the trunk.

Ming Camp Bell makes a good point:

"if it would not seem flippant, I would say to Philip Hammond 'welcome to the club'".
But he welcome the defence secretary's acknowledgement that, in terms of the military, "our publicly-stated ambitions now significantly exceed our capacity".

I think my publicly stated ambitions were exceeded long ago!!

Well its been nearly seven years since "stretched but not overstretched" so I guess being at least taut (however it is spelt) now should be no surprise.

Whell........ As Coffman brawt me up on the use of Gramar in anover fred, one wont taik advantage off a simila situatun.


:ok:

My fault ... now corrected ... I waz a scientist at school :(

PS ... I won't blame it on fat fingers and the iPad ... :E

Isn't "extremely taut" the state immediately before "broken"?

Not to worry, the troops got £1.3 million of the LIBOR fines..

No I'm sure there is another piece of doublespeak BS that can be wheeled out to describe a state between then.

"Advanced state of tensile dependability" or "has not yet attained a state of tensile unreliability".......:rolleyes:

Biggus

I agree, £600 or £360 after tax would make a difference-ish (£30 per month). However, if we didn't have Seedcorn funded then it is my belief that the £22M per year goes back to the Defence Budget and then a more deserving case like an extra couple of drivers for a Colonel would probably be funded :ugh:

Unless anyone can correct me who understands or works close to the ABC (Annual Budgt C???) mechanism would like to comment?

LJ

Al R - I know your post is in sarcasm. But I wonder if the media/general public realise that this is less than £9.50 per HMForces person before tax? I know it is going to Service charities, but this figure doesn't go far when you consider who might benefit from it in monetary terms.

I wonder if HMTresaury will Gift Aid it?

LJ

I saw the bit where he said Cameron and Osborne agreed with him.

Now whether that is true or not it draws a line in the sand. They have to back him or sack him.

PS,

As BEagle implied :)

Leon,

Perhaps this is all part of the grand redundancy master plan. The spinners can't wait to suggest that each serviceman will soon benefit to the tune of £25,000 each. I don't suggest any beneficiary is more or less worthy than the next, but shouldn't helping Felix with decompression be a role of the MoD, and not the bankers, 'taut' or not?

Felix Fund – The Bomb Disposal Charity | Supporting bomb disposal experts

Felix deserves more post op help than most, of course it does. But how offensive is the implication that the state seems to consider that those injured or suffering as a result of serving should be reliant on charity and handouts, and not the state? No wonder the troops feel undervalued. Stop making the troops beg Gideon.

Then you wouldn't have to make such undermine your office further with embarrassing statements like this and maybe we'd all feel better.

My Dad said things were getting bad in 67. He then said things were tight in 71/2 when we pulled out of the Far East. In 74 he came out on redundancy and said the backbone of the RAF would be broken. I joined in 78.Within 3 years we were saying cuts were going to far. I think we hit the “Anymore cuts and we can’t cope anymore” in 84, 87, 91, 95, 97, 01, 03, and for me in 07 when I came out on redundancy. On every occasion the masters in charge said “Anymore and it will break!! In my life I have seen the RAF demolished from nearly 200,000 to 35,000.

Personally, I don’t think it will stop until there are 200 Personnel and two aircraft (one spare) to fly the flag of so called Great Britain.

Unless of course we have a proper war and the politicians will say “o oh, we fcuked up again!!!!”

I don't even think we could have a proper war any more. We don't have enough kit to last long and when you think how long it takes to make things these days, the war would be over long before we could get any spares to the front line.

Al - so true and rarely said. Injured etc servicemen shouldn't be charity cases they should be taken care of by the government. Help For Heroes, worthy though they are and I'm not wanting to criticise their work, have spent millions on things the MOD or NHS should have done. But it turns veterans into charity takers and many find that hard to accept.

I totally agree, I bet the Government must love these charities springing up as it gives them the chance to shirk their responsibilities.