More flak for defence sec!
UK Defence Secretary has come under fire from "senior defence sources" who claim that a budget underspend of £1.8 billion has caused unnecessary pain to the services.
To my mind this complaint seems essentially unreasonable in that had the MOD gone and spent this money on something, anything, needed or not, they would be perfectly happy. Does anyone here run their home finances on that basis? Interested to hear the service view though. |
An "underspend" like this isn't necessarily caused by efficiency. It could be caused by slowing down the approvals process, in which case the criticism could be justified.
|
It is also the result of annularity that in the past has been a silly season in February/March with a rush to spend unallocated funds resulting in footpaths across sports fields (Lyneham) and many other barely nice-to-have items.
|
I enjoyed reading Hammond's robust rebuttal of the claims. He is the best DS we have had for a long time.
|
PN wrote:
It is also the result of annularity that in the past has been a silly season in February/March with a rush to spend unallocated funds resulting in footpaths across sports fields (Lyneham) and many other barely nice-to-have items. |
Had a lovely ride-on mower at Wyton early 90s for the big OMQ - which had very big back gardens. Our then 3 year-old loved sitting on my lap to drive it - 3 years later with me now a civilian and living in Devon, the boy was in the car on his own for a few seconds and released the hand brake. His mower driving experience probably saved his life as, he explained, he steered the car into the gate rather than across the lane into a bank and ditch. Glad he did not get hurt - now a Yachtmaster Ocean and a graduate in yacht construction and survey.
|
Trim stab,
Best sec-def. that's quite relative. Every single one of them has cut the military to one degree or another, or made us less effective. Hammond is just like Dr Who, another incarnation of the same Fu(kwit. |
Of course any description starting with "best" is relative, high spirits. but spending more than we have, in our case, £36 billion which simply didn't exist, doesn't make our country more secure.
The quote from the senior military officer (hope he is senior, goodness knows what would happen to anyone junior who did this!) read...."we can hardly ask for an increased budget when we can't even spend the budget we've been allocated. It just makes the MOD look incompetent". Yeah, just spend it, Doesn't matter what on...! If not doing that is incompetence then let's have more! |
4mas, indeed. At a particular presentation not that long ago, 10 years say, a 2* very proudly related how he had bought a load of 'maximum rectangle' carpets for AMQs.
He had bumped into Mr Carpet Right and asked him what he could do. He said he had £600k of thereabout so Mr CR said he could recarpet N-quarters. I guess that was one snr officer with a second career lined up. |
Perhaps we can quickly spend the money on a large capital asset. Maybe another big Boeing?
Personally, I would rather to see my pay keep place with inflation... |
£1.8Bn?
Should be just enough to buy 1 G6 fighter circa 2040, assuming they can invest the money in a high interest account. |
Rolling Budgets
I thought I read somewhere that Hammond has got, or at least is trying to get, rolling budgets for agreed procurements so money not spent on a project in one financial year can be carried forward to the next, and that there is not this absolute nonsense of 'spend, spend, spend' before 5 April. Ride-on mowers, new carpets, four hundred years' worth of pencils... what sort of nonsense is that? Mind you, our Local Council works in exactly the same manner... one doesn't see anything being done by the roads folk all year, and then suddenly in March all the pavements outside the Councillors' houses are lovingly resurfaced...
If he has done that, and the comment by the Senior Orwficers is based on past practice, bravo zulu to Hammond. Anyone able to confirm or refute? |
Mind you, our Local Council works in exactly the same manner... one doesn't see anything being done by the roads folk all year, and then suddenly in March But, I do agree, that the last minute spend is madness. Furthermore, this new DIO (Defence Infrastructure Organisation) crock-of-crap that Hammond invented is completely useless and a HUGE waste of money. I've seen quotes from local professional building companies put in quotes for 40% of the cost of DIO's and the latest 'crowning turd in the water-pipe' is that DIO would not take anymore works in July for the rest of the financial year (yes, a whole 8 months!) because they haven't got much works service capacity left. :ugh: Give the money back to the Station Commanders, employ OC SSSs again, get rid of Regional Prime Contractors (who also appear to be crooks bumping up prices with a '40% variance' for DIO) and allow them to employ local companies to do the work. The DIO should be like the MAA, regulators for building works and employ a couple of hundred people and not the thousands that they have grown into. Rant over and out! LJ := |
Originally Posted by Leon Jabachjabicz
(Post 8096522)
. . . get rid of Regional Prime Contractors
I was able to close that contract down which would have been impossible, or at a cost, under MPBW, DOE, PSA, RAFIO etc. |
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator
It is also the result of annularity that in the past has been a silly season in February/March with a rush to spend unallocated funds
|
Leon:-
Give the money back to the Station Commanders Your Boss should be the focus of your commitment to serve, and you should be the focus of his. How can that work if he has no real powers of command but has to plead forever upwards on your behalf or, worse still, you are left to do the begging for yourself? Station Commanders used to be the equivalent of Mayors (more like the continental variety, rather than UK political appointees) of their "towns". They had their budget and spent it according, in their view, to how it would best work for the Morale and Efficiency of their command. Of course it wasn't consistent. If you had a poor SC you had a poor Station (I experienced one such). If you had a poor Boss you had a poor Squadron (thankfully, I never did). However, if you had a good Boss and a good SC, you knew it because everything around you and your own sense of being valued told you so. It was something called leadership... |
Looking at one of the reports on the subject Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked - Telegraph
An “overzealous” austerity drive meant the Forces were missing out on vital equipment, senior military sources have told The Daily Telegraph. They have accused ministers and civil servants of failing to manage the defence budget properly after the MoD failed to spend all the money it was allocated for 2012-13. Section 3 j. Budget not overspent: Budget is not underspent by over 1% against TLB control totals. Reading on, A senior military officer commented: “The MoD can hardly expect the Treasury to increase the budget for capital equipment when we can’t even spend the budget we’ve been allocated. It just makes us look incompetent.” That plan is based on the assumption that total spending on equipment will rise every year from 2015. But those increases have not yet been confirmed, and defence chiefs worry the underspend will make it harder for the MoD to negotiate the increases they need. “We now budget prudently and then roll forward any underspend to future years, allowing us to place new equipment orders.” Being long out of it, is it still the case that gash money from staff can be translated to material but the same from material can't be spent on staff? |
Is that really naive? It sounds like pure common sense to me. And yes, of course you're absolutely right in saying that Treasury, and other departments for that matter, will argue there are more important destinations for (our) money. It's down to the service chiefs, as it always has been, to do their jobs and argue back robustly.
|
Originally Posted by Chugalug2
(Post 8096590)
Station Commanders used to be the equivalent of Mayors (more like the continental variety, rather than UK political appointees) of their "towns". They had their budget and spent it according, in their view, to how it would best work for the Morale and Efficiency of their command. Of course it wasn't consistent.
Now the man who actually ran the airfield had such a nice office so he was evicted. He still wanted to see what was going on so in turn he evicted the guy who managed the airfield on his behalf. In turn he evicted the SNavO who only needed a windowless cubby. But OC Ops's new office didn't have room for a conference table so a wall had to be knocked down. He also wanted to be able to call his PA, who now had to share an office with the staish's PA, so another hole had to be knocked in the wall. But simples, the staish had the budget. 'Lo, the following tour the new staish had had enough of running airfields and had a wg cdr to do that. He wanted to command the whole station and there was only one place to do that! Apart from a piano burning incident he did rather well for himself and the other man retired as a gp capt. Sometimes there is justice. |
...and the SNavO still lives in a windowless* cubby to this very day.
*Technically there is a window, although it's more of a sunroof than anything else. Plus, one has to stand on a chair and remove a couple of polystyrene tiles from the false ceiling to access it. Except the glass is covered in moss, thus swathing the room in a green glow when the sun is shining, which it seldom does. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:32. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.