Election Defence Debate
 

DEFENCE DEBATE: Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Shadow Defence Secretary Nia Griffith and Lib Dem defence spokeswoman Julie Smith are taking part in an election debate at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank, chaired by Times Defence Editor Lucy Fisher. From 12.30 p.m. Livestream here.

https://rusi.org/event/pre-election-defence-debate-0

I shall be on the look out for that. Hopefully this will amount to rather more detail than would ya wouldn't ya regarding Trident, would ya wouldn't ya allow the continued hounding of ex-soldiers over Historic Allegations and how much they're going to spend on better provision for those who have served the colours! The last point the Labour Party are trying to capitalize on. They will also implement another SDSR, I personally imagine that it is the upshot of that which will reveal the true disposition of a Labour Government on National Defence and Security.

FB

FB, I have long been impressed by your optimism!:ok:

CG

Yes indeed CG, the prospect of a Labour Government, particularly on this issue, reminds me of that old story about the reviewing officer at Sandhurst, Cranwell etc, when giving his address to the new intake on passing out, reflects on the achievements of those on parade. Starting with those who have achieved distinction and working his way to mentioning those who managed to muddle through, just. But in order to give them heart and reassure, the good General/Air Chief Marshal/Admiral claims to have had such a scarcely satisfactory assessment himself when he graduated, and look at him now etc. He goes on to tell the foregathered that in fact the College Commandant was minded to write about him that, anyone who would follow this officer anywhere would do so, surely, out of mere curiosity!

Well CG, that is how I feel about a Corbyn Government, especially on the subject at hand, it would be very intriguing!

FB

Wow... so Security and defence is THE TOP PRIORITY for Labour :eek: So why have we not heard them say a thing about it in the campaigning?

MFC Fly,

I don't believe it is, personally I don't think its much of a priority for the Tories either, certainly not any of the wee parties. However, you can be sure as Christmas sales that as soon as any MP from a big party, like Labour, the effused support for a 'serious' Defence policy will be forthcoming.

FB

We all know that politicians are big on defence. They all like to sit on de fence.

The Labour lady spoke of NATO as if it were a place. The Lib Dem admitted she was a sub, as the proper guy couldn’t get there because it was too far and too difficult to travel. I’m not sure either mentioned anything of substance.

That meant three of the four hadn’t a scoobie, leaving Ben Wallace. He started off well, but then resorted to the propaganda that the likes of MRA4 (which was the subject of the question) was cancelled because of the deficit. And his memory of PFI origins left something to be desired. But otherwise he spoke very well of some detailed matters, which one would expect. I did like his rant about Tracer/FRES/Boxer. He doesn’t look old enough to remember Tracer, which was always a case study in how not to do it during MoD training in the 90s. But, overall, he wiped the floor with the others. What, a Minister knows his subject? Can’t have that.

Well in the debate the opening statement from Nia Griffith, the Shadow Defence Secretary, she clearly started out by saying... "For Labour, the security and defence of this country is of paramount importance, it's our top priority".

I've always thought that, she has sounded quite sincere the few times I've seen her holding forth on the matter, but as you say, Corbyn, McDonnell, Thornberry and Abbott might try and maintain a similar posture (might try to) but I doubt if they would come across at all sincere.

FB

As someone once said, the trouble with democracy is that whoever you vote for, the Government gets in!

Have seen nearly all of this before (several times!) and have no faith in any party any more! I just wish that there was a space on the voting paper for "None of the Above!" and that it would be counted along with all other votes. At least it might send a message to these self-serving *****'s !

Bill

Bill. Writing something to that effect across the paper whist not filling out ( or filling in all the boxes) results in a "spoiled vote " which has to be registered and declared in the final tally. This is a traditional vehicle for expressing rejection of the "choices "offered .

Unfortunately although still paying U.K taxes ( on a long frozen national pension) and being a U.K. citizen I am deprived of this democratic right of representation having left the U.K. over 15 years ago ( and before this law was enacted).
Not a whinge , just a statement about a constitutional anomaly.

Meanwhile on Planet Earth, we accept that Defence doesn't win elections, so they might as well have debated what the best breakfast menu is.

Yet another thread that has turned out to be nothing to do with Military Aviation.

Come on guys, keep it for JB.

Defence in the 21st century heavily relies on aviation. From air defence, air interdiction, close air support, support/attack helicopters, air transport (tactical and strategic), missile defence and offence and a significant amount of the UK's intelligence gathering capability. All related to aviation. Aviation is a huge part of defence, so I would argue the thread is relevant because the debate in question is so broad. There's loads I've missed out - that's by no means a complete list!

The spoiled ballot paper stats might be glanced at, but an empty seat in the House generated from a winning "None of the Above" vote would tell them more. I suspect the whole building would be well-nigh empty!

BVRAAM: I'm fully aware of that but if you have been reading the recent posts you will see ref to global warming etc.