Here is a copy of parts of a paper from the Army arguing against the large increases in Accommodation Charges that our in touch civil servants wish to implement as part of our 2007 pay rise. I bet a NAAFI growler that the Civil Servants get their way. "AFPRB 2007 PAY REVIEW â ACCOMMODATION CHARGES 2. The lone recommendation of this paper is not supported by any tenable argument offered within it, and the evidence cited in the paper is at variance with the discussions on DE delivery which I understand took place at the last Joint Customer Board (JCB) meeting on 6 Jul 06. I offer that the real position with respect to accommodation is different to that depicted in the paper. Further, I suggest that we will have a significant challenge in justifying rises in accommodation charges to our people for the following reasons: a. The launch of MODern Housing Solutions has been a disaster. b. To claim the 05/06 GB SFA upgrade programme a success conceals the fact that the benchmark target was set too low at the outset. c. So far this year no SFA upgrades have been carried out and work is unlikely to start until much later this year. Thus, the probability of MODern Housing Solutionsâ delivering 1065 promised upgrades by the end of FY 06/07 is low. d. Further upgrade programmes are under resourced to meet previous targets and current expectations. The current slippage in the upgrade programme will mean our people and their families returning to UK from Germany as part of the FAS will be forced to occupy poor condition SFA, i.e. those that are currently void, awaiting upgrade or assessed to be below Grade 4 for condition. e. Project SLAM Phase 2 will not now have the funding envisaged in Apr 06. 3. To advocate accommodation charge increases in the climate set out above is disingenuous to those who have no choice but occupy the accommodation, and who do not have the to right to withhold payment in the face of an unacceptable level of service. I suggest that SPPol recognise the failures in delivery and recommend freezing accommodation charges for the AFPRB 2007 round until suitably funded, viable and deliverable options are developed and put in place. The MOD is not delivering what was promised; credit might be gained from recognising this and acting upon it rather than attempting to maintain the faÃ§ade that âall is wellâ. 4. Our specific comments are as follows: a. The paper relies heavily upon statistical evidence. However, upon detailed examination that evidence is far from error-free and, as a consequence, creates a misleading picture. b. Project SLAM Phase 2 will not now have the funding envisaged in Apr 06; this is known to SP Pol. The reality appears to be that SLAM would deliver at best 2600 Army bed spaces between 2008-2013 â this will only deliver 8% of the outstanding requirement. The facts omitted by the paper are: (1) 58% of SLA accommodation is currently Grade 3 or below. (2) Even with full funding 53% of SLA will still be Grade 3 or below by Apr 08. (3) Even with full funding it will take the MOD a further 7 years to reduce that figure to 29% at Grade 3 or below. c. On normalisation NI will cease to be an operational theatre and therefore the SLA condition should be set to meet non-operational standards and expectations, not simply left at operational standards.