Army ‘to be cut by 20,000’ if No 10 plan is approved

I couldn't agree more. While numbers aren't the whole story they are an excellent way of demonstrating will. Post Brexit our hold in Gibraltar, The Falklands, SBAs in Cyprus and other territories are likely to be undermined and potentially attacked if we concomitantly reduce numbers (will) in these locations. I wonder if Cummings has considered this?.
Numbers buy you chances to get out of trouble, a leaner force can't afford to make any mistakes..
 
You and PhotEx are much of a muchness in this respect. I was dissatisfied with the number of people excelling at being idiots in the RAF, I got out and moved on. And so on.
So you moved to the civil service, where there was less competition and your idiocy could have a chance to shine? :)
 
Of course they aren't free. A significant amount comes from the tax payer. And even allowing for any contributions from civil servants themselves,
I've got news for you...
 

lextalionis

Old-Salt
The hollowness of the public services has been shown by the response to the present pestilence, which has been rated as among the worst in the world (UK has world's second-worst coronavirus death rate, analysis suggests). They are strikingly, alarmingly, pathetically incompetent.

The scale of reform needed is breathtaking, but it points to the moral, intellectual and financial corruption of many public services, including the NHS, the Home Civil Service and, yes, our armed forces. Entirely new approaches are perhaps called for.

For our armed forces, that may mean a smaller but more educated officer corps, a much leaner MoD and far greater use and interrogation of thought (academic, military, etc.) in planning and policy. If we don't deal with these problems now, we might face much more terrible problems in future.
 
The hollowness of the public services has been shown by the response to the present pestilence, which has been rated as among the worst in the world (UK has world's second-worst coronavirus death rate, analysis suggests). They are strikingly, alarmingly, pathetically incompetent.

The scale of reform needed is breathtaking, but it points to the moral, intellectual and financial corruption of many public services, including the NHS, the Home Civil Service and, yes, our armed forces. Entirely new approaches are perhaps called for.

For our armed forces, that may mean a smaller but more educated officer corps, a much leaner MoD and far greater use and interrogation of thought (academic, military, etc.) in planning and policy. If we don't deal with these problems now, we might face much more terrible problems in future.
advancement in the CS is not on merit or competence, it’s the best box ticker that gets the worm.
 
Clever NRPS* solved this problem by saving those jobs for the otherwise unemployed who appreciated the extra money.
That's a very good point. I was in the TA whilst I was at college studying for A Levels. I'd regularly go in for odd half days during the week, and also consistently volunteered to go on the Advance Party with the SQMS and Chief Chip whenever there was a Sqn weekend away.

Most times I'd be doing gash jobs but I'd volunteered and got paid extra so it never seemed to matter. Entirely different in the Regs, where I'd run a mile to avoid doing them, on the principle of 'You've got to skive to survive'!

ETA: and fast forward many years to when I was a Staffy running the Sigs Wing of a mixed Reg/TA unit, I'd much rather have willing volunteers from the TA sub-units to assist in Equipment Care Inspections and Boards of Officers, etc., rather than pressed men and women from the Regular one. And the NRPS Regt 2ic was happy to support that and sign the attendance sheets.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

ACAB

LE
I couldn't agree more. While numbers aren't the whole story they are an excellent way of demonstrating will. Post Brexit our hold in Gibraltar, The Falklands, SBAs in Cyprus and other territories are likely to be undermined and potentially attacked if we concomitantly reduce numbers (will) in these locations. I wonder if Cummings has considered this?.
I'm sure he has you muppet.
 
advancement in the CS is not on merit or competence, it’s the best box ticker that gets the worm.
As is the rest of the world.
 
The hollowness of the public services has been shown by the response to the present pestilence, which has been rated as among the worst in the world (UK has world's second-worst coronavirus death rate, analysis suggests). They are strikingly, alarmingly, pathetically incompetent.

The scale of reform needed is breathtaking, but it points to the moral, intellectual and financial corruption of many public services, including the NHS, the Home Civil Service and, yes, our armed forces. Entirely new approaches are perhaps called for.

For our armed forces, that may mean a smaller but more educated officer corps, a much leaner MoD and far greater use and interrogation of thought (academic, military, etc.) in planning and policy. If we don't deal with these problems now, we might face much more terrible problems in future.
The endemic problems with the public services have come in two waves:

1. Blair and Brown - massive investment but the vast majority of it went on pay rises and employment of women in lower-level roles on a largely part-time time basis e.g. the profusion of teaching assistants in schools. No real structural reform and no real efficiency savings.

2. Cameron and Osborne - massive cut backs with penny-pinching becoming the order of the day and a definite philosophy of saving pennies today in order to spend pounds tomorrow e.g. recycled copy paper for printing which caused constant printer and copier jams, only to find that maintenance contracts had not been renewed either. Also massive cuts to T&S budgets to the point of deterring people from attending external meetings and training courses and massive changes to T&Cs further demoralising the workforce. This was carried on by May and Hammond.

When the Boomers and Gen X leave the Civil Service and Local Government starting really from now, both organisations will be utterly screwed because there will be no institutional experience and no corporate memory.
 
The hollowness of the public services has been shown by the response to the present pestilence, which has been rated as among the worst in the world (UK has world's second-worst coronavirus death rate, analysis suggests). They are strikingly, alarmingly, pathetically incompetent.

The scale of reform needed is breathtaking, but it points to the moral, intellectual and financial corruption of many public services, including the NHS, the Home Civil Service and, yes, our armed forces. Entirely new approaches are perhaps called for.

For our armed forces, that may mean a smaller but more educated officer corps, a much leaner MoD and far greater use and interrogation of thought (academic, military, etc.) in planning and policy. If we don't deal with these problems now, we might face much more terrible problems in future.
Why is it that whenever certain people on Arrse either raise or discuss modernising or adapting our Armed Forces their focus is on Officers? There's very much more to our AF than officers and making them more educated makes them much less experienced in practical application of military tactics and application of force, personnel management, team building etc purely because you'd be taking them away from where they would learn these things.

If you seriously think officers need to be more educated then said education needs to be done concurrently with the practical side of things with, I don't know, maybe the use of technology like service laptops and leave the most important stuff for those who earn their way towards the top without cap badge or family favour.

Any officer stream needs a large base from which the best can evolve, cutting it by tinkering would destroy the opportunity for learning and development and the same is true of the MoD, Armed Forces and CS (the NHS is untouchable when you have a minority government or one with just an 80 seat majority).

The size and ability of our Armed Forces isn't dependent on the education of it's officers, it's dependent largely on the whim of politicians and availability of funding and, as always, Defence is never a priority for spending* when money is tight.

* whether spending on barracks, accommodation and equipment has been neglected for decades or not.
 
The endemic problems with the public services have come in two waves:

1. Blair and Brown - massive investment but the vast majority of it went on pay rises and employment of women in lower-level roles on a largely part-time time basis e.g. the profusion of teaching assistants in schools. No real structural reform and no real efficiency savings.

2. Cameron and Osborne - massive cut backs with penny-pinching becoming the order of the day and a definite philosophy of saving pennies today in order to spend pounds tomorrow e.g. recycled copy paper for printing which caused constant printer and copier jams, only to find that maintenance contracts had not been renewed either. Also massive cuts to T&S budgets to the point of deterring people from attending external meetings and training courses and massive changes to T&Cs further demoralising the workforce. This was carried on by May and Hammond.

When the Boomers and Gen X leave the Civil Service and Local Government starting really from now, both organisations will be utterly screwed because there will be no institutional experience and no corporate memory.
Largely agree with that but I'd say Blair & Brown deliberately underfunded the MoD by not providing funding for essential equipment and upgrading and relied on UOR to get them out of an embarrassing hole they'd dug for themselves.

Cameron & Osbourne were also responsible for the military estate maintenance being sidelined and (cap badge specific I know) the loss of contracts for things like tools and maintenance equipment, something that's still on-going today.
 

Bob65

War Hero
There's very much more to our AF than officers and making them more educated makes them much less experienced in practical application of military tactics and application of force, personnel management, team building etc purely because you'd be taking them away from where they would learn these things.
I partly agree, but there are things that the officer corps is if not entirely responsible for, has a very great input into, that they are demonstrably ill-prepared for, such as every procurement debacle. At least they have an excuse of also having other officer stuff to do; MoD CS for whom it is their entire job aren't much better. But someone has to grip this situation and if not the officer corps then who?
 
So you moved to the civil service, where there was less competition and your idiocy could have a chance to shine? :)
Do stop making shit up. I went to KSA, I contracted, I worked in engineering production, I took the opportunity to try out stuff because I could. I've posted in this very thread that I've never worked for the CS as well. Your sieve like memory doesn't help does it?

Wouldn't matter if I had been one, I'd have jacked it were I not happy in my job.
 
When the Boomers and Gen X leave the Civil Service and Local Government starting really from now, both organisations will be utterly screwed because there will be no institutional experience and no corporate memory.
Feature, not a bug.
 
I posted this on another thread, (How does the 2 REP (FFL) compare to the British Paras?) but I think it is far more relevant here:

General Thierry Burkhard, former 2 REP and Foreign Legion Officer, now CEMAT or Chief of the General Staff of the French Army, has just released a 17 minute video explaining his vision to all his subordinates. Of course it is in French, but the gist that I get is that there is a well developed plan to prepare the French Army to meet all the requirements that are likely to be demanded of it over the next 10-20 years, where there is an expectation of increased likelihood of major conflict.

These requirements are to cover peer-to-peer symmetric warfare as well as asymmetric warfare of various sorts and an emphasis on interoperability nationally and internationally. The French are aiming to be able to deploy a division and will be exercising at this level by 2024.

The impression that I get is that he is also aiming to instill the sort of grit, psychological resilience, physical readiness and can-do attitude found in the Legion into the rest of the French Army. To this is to be added a systematic programme of major equipment modernisation and digitalisation. A review of military administrative structures and procedures with a view to paring down unneccessary duplication and layering in order to streamline and accelerate processes.

The relevant point here to keep within the thread topic is that this plan presents a coherent and strategically sound way forward for the French Army to maintain its capability in supporting French policies nationally and within its EU and NATO commitments.

It is a pity that there is nothing of a similar nature being advocated so succinctly on this side of the channel.


Edited in the morning for typos.
 
Last edited:
I posted this on another thread, (How does the 2 REP (FFL) compare to the British Paras?) but I think it is far more relevant here:

General Thierry Burkhard, former 2 REP and Foreign Legion Officer, now CEMAT or Chief of the General Staff of the French Army, has just released a 17 minute video explaining his vision to all his subordinates. Of course it is in French, but the gist that I get is that there is a well developed plan to prepare the French Army to meet all the requirements that are likely to be demanded of it over the next 10-20 years, where there is an expectation of increased likelihood of major conflict.

These requirements are to cover peer-to-peer symmetric warfare as well as asymmetric warfare of various sorts and an emphasis on interoperability nationally and internationally. The French are aiming to be able to deploy a division and will be exercising at this level by 2024.

The impression that I get is that he is also aiming to instill the sort of grit, psychological resilience, physical readiness and can-do attitude found in the Legion into the rest of the French Army. To this is to be added a systematic programme of major equipment modernisation and digitalisation. A review of military administrative structures and procedures with a view to paring down unneccessary duplication and layering in order to streamline and accelerate processes.

The relevant point here to keep within the thread topic is that 2 This plan presents a coherent and strategically sound way forward for the French Army to maintain its capability in supporting French policies nationally and within its EU and NATO commitments.

It is a pity that there is nothing of a similar nature being advocated so succinctly on this side of the channel.

I've always liked the US marine idea, that everyone is a rifleman and its teeth to tail ratio, is thus immaterial. Its quite pertinant, in a time of defence cuts and as our services have shrunk, its arguable that a more warrior ethos should pervade all three services, but our MOD the other day were talking about removing the laddish attitude from the services to make them more attractive to diversity.

Outcomes matter more than words and the MOD quite clearly do not care about having services which are lean, hungry and nasty in battle.
 
The endemic problems with the public services have come in two waves:

1. Blair and Brown - massive investment but the vast majority of it went on pay rises and employment of women in lower-level roles on a largely part-time time basis e.g. the profusion of teaching assistants in schools. No real structural reform and no real efficiency savings.

2. Cameron and Osborne - massive cut backs with penny-pinching becoming the order of the day and a definite philosophy of saving pennies today in order to spend pounds tomorrow e.g. recycled copy paper for printing which caused constant printer and copier jams, only to find that maintenance contracts had not been renewed either. Also massive cuts to T&S budgets to the point of deterring people from attending external meetings and training courses and massive changes to T&Cs further demoralising the workforce. This was carried on by May and Hammond.

When the Boomers and Gen X leave the Civil Service and Local Government starting really from now, both organisations will be utterly screwed because there will be no institutional experience and no corporate memory.
Computers make people dumb, the gen X and boomers had to think more for themselves.
 

Latest Threads

Top