Costs of Staff for Defence Chiefs

#1
Attached link to Telegraph article about the rising costs of staff for some senior personnel. I'm not interested in the argument as to whether paying their staff costs is a waste of money because anyone serving will (hopefully) understand that people at that level absolutely need the requisite support. What is (vaguely) interesting however is that fact that

By contrast, the First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, and the Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Peter Wall, have managed to reduce the cost of their household staff.
Admiral Stanhope cut his bill from £161,000 in 2009-10 to £113,000 in 2011-12, while General Wall more than halved his costs from £124,000 in 2009-10 to £59,000 in 2011-12.
Good to see that CGS has reduced his bill but why on God's earth would the 1SL need a budget that is roughly double that of CGS? I can't imagine his commitments are any more onerous.

Three defence chiefs' staff costs rise as frontline troops are cut - Telegraph
 
#2
One really needs a detailed analysis of what the money is being spent on. It is quite possible that the people who have cut they budget have simply switched the costs to somewhere else, after all their household staff are not the only people they command.
 
#4
Colonial Grand pooh bar residential standards in a post colonial defence world.

Find out what the Commandant of the USMC gets and divvy up the equivalent sum and perks between our assorted bodies.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#5
Attached link to Telegraph article about the rising costs of staff for some senior personnel. I'm not interested in the argument as to whether paying their staff costs is a waste of money because anyone serving will (hopefully) understand that people at that level absolutely need the requisite support. What is (vaguely) interesting however is that fact that



Good to see that CGS has reduced his bill but why on God's earth would the FSL need a budget that is roughly double that of CGS? I can't imagine his commitments are any more onerous.

Three defence chiefs' staff costs rise as frontline troops are cut - Telegraph
Maybe CGS has delegated hosting of boring politicians to the 1SL :)
 
#7
Its a non story. The three service chiefs get to occupy some fairly average, borderline shabby appartments that are far from the height of grandeur. They use these for official business, and to provide them with a location in London to work from. They are not 'homes' in any traditional sense.
They use them for hosting, and for doing a lot of delicate diplomatic work which is intangible but has real benefits. Having seen how the world of quiet diplomacy works first hand, I'm genuinely astounded at how much is done behind the scenes in discrete dinners with other nations officers.
Finally, the cost of the retinue is to provide cooks, valets and drivers, in order to get their principal to work a long day (usually pre 0700 - 2200, often 7 days per week) and turn up right time, right rig and not look a pile of shite. If you saw the diary of a 4*, you'd see that these are very busy people - even injecting 20 minutes to let the Admiral iron his own shirt could lead to 2 cancelled appointments, and delay decisions being taken. Personally I'd rather the seniors led their services, not ironed their uniform!

As for the CGS / 1SL discrepancy, were I cynical, I'd look to the relative size of their larger offices in MB and the FLC and ask how many of the staff costs of CGS have been absorbed elsewhere?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads