David Cameron: My radical plan for Britain's armed forces

#1
David Cameron: My radical plan for Britain's armed forces
David Cameron has unveiled his "radical" plan for the future of Britain's armed forces in a bold move to end the bitter row over defence.

By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor
Published: 8:30PM BST 02 Oct 2010
8 Comments

David Cameron arrives in Birmingham Photo: AP
Conservative Party Conference 2010 live
Taking full charge of the issue for the first time, the Prime Minister disclosed that more Chinook helicopters would be made available for British troops in Afghanistan.

Related Articles
David Cameron: I will never shift from the centre ground
Cameron must stand firm against Miliband's unprincipled assault
Liam Fox: defence cuts will have 'grave consequences'
Osborne hits back in Tory defence battle
Ed Miliband: my vision to rebuild trust
Afghanistan: Gordon Brown accused of 'dereliction of duty'
Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph on the eve of the Tory party conference, he pledged that Britain’s Armed Forces would be given “everything that they need” to fight the Taliban.
Even after key spending decisions were made in the coming months, he said Britain would “go on having one of the largest defence budgets in the world”.
He lambasted Labour for leaving his government a “complete car crash” of a defence budget – overspent by £38 billion and with major decisions not taken.
Last week the simmering row over defence cuts — which Mr Cameron admitted involved “lively discussions” — boiled over with the leak to The Daily Telegraph of a letter written by Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, to the Prime Minister. It warned of “grave consequences” of making “draconian” cuts at a time of war.
More
David Cameron: My radical plan for Britain's armed forces - Telegraph
 
#2
Shouldn't it read:

David Cameron - My radical plan to save money from all sectors to pay for the spongers of this country. Any plan involving any sector is to save money.
 
#5
#6
I've decided Cameron is a good quality PM and will stand the test of time.

Just imagine if Brown won about 9 more seats and clung on to power with Clegg, bleurgh.
 
#7
Thank f I will be leaving for foreign climes any time now.
 
#8
When he says "Even after key spending decisions were made in the coming months, he said Britain would “go on having one of the largest defence budgets in the world”.
I assume he means in £sd, not percentage of Gross. where we lag behind some Third World countries. Surely not Tory Spin?
 
#9
When he says "Even after key spending decisions were made in the coming months, he said Britain would “go on having one of the largest defence budgets in the world”.
I assume he means in £sd, not percentage of Gross. where we lag behind some Third World countries. Surely not Tory Spin?
Yes, we lag quite a way behind some third world military dictatorship shit-holes.
 
#10
Is that so bad though? Third World Dictorship shitholes have large military spending because often their countries are under much more direct threats then ours, plus the military is often a very powerful institution with a great sway in politics.

Just because, say, Saudi Arabia spends 8.2% of its GDP on defence, we should too?
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#11
He may well have a radical plan for the armed forces, but he didn't tell the Torygraph what it was. I strongly suspect that the really hard thinking which is going on at the moment is not really about SDSR but about the level of pain which it is politically possible to inflict: which may not be as much as we are dreading...
 
#12
Is that so bad though? Third World Dictorship shitholes have large military spending because often their countries are under much more direct threats then ours, plus the military is often a very powerful institution with a great sway in politics.

Just because, say, Saudi Arabia spends 8.2% of its GDP on defence, we should too?
My Bold - yes - because it's a deterent - what happened in the 1980's when we said Explorer wasn't being updated/being pulled from the South Atlantic - gave whatishis name Galterri an idea that we weren't interested. We paid a very high price for that one.

Same as Trident, expensive, but pinko liberals that say we can do without it are wooly headed = thinking that if we disarm other 3rd world idiots will follow suit.......... you can't un-invent the wheel!

As the man said .."Walk softly, but carry a big stick!"
 
#13
I am not saying we disarm. We are richer then third world shit holes hence we don't have to spend as much of our budget. Saudi Arabia spends 8.2% of its budget on Defence compared to our 2.3%, but our defence budget is still 17 billion larger then Saudis. Not only that, the Saudi's have much more immediate threats then we do.


Personally, I would like to see our defence budget go up to 3%. Anything more is completely unnecessary at this moment in time.



If we spent 8.2% of our GDP on defence that would equal 180 billion or there abouts. As I said, completely unnecessary
 
#14
In the current climate, Fox would probably be content just to see the budget for Trident replacement shipped back to the Treasury rather than out of MoD. If Cameron accepts that, then Fox has a victory.
What I do find encouraging is the (probably brutal) simplification of benefits. Next, we should see an equally crafty 'simplification' of the NHS. Those are the two unspeakably large elephants in the room that haven't been discussed yet.
 
#15
Increasing the %GDP spend on the NHS didn't automatically improve the service. Why should defence be any different? We still have the same old parasites looking to help themselves from the public purse. Unless the appallingly wasteful state of defence procurement is sorted, I just can't see a hard-pressed taxpaying public who for the most part have very little experience of and less interest in the Armed Forces supporting yet more expense.

Extensive cuts to other public services looks far more doubtful than in the halcyon days of the immediate post-election period. Anyone else notice the new line being punted? "The cuts may not be as painful as everyone thinks". Dave's turning out to be a JAP - Just Another Politician.
 
#16
Japan spends less than 1% of GDP on defence and has a kickarse military with top class kit.
 
#17
So here what Dave said to the Sunday Telegraph:
...
Cameron on Defence

Mr Cameron disclosed that Liam Fox had been in No 10 that morning – in the wake of the row over the Defence Secretary’s leaked letter to the Prime Minister in which he had warned of the “grave dangers” of making “draconian” spending cuts.
The pair had a “very good chat,” the Prime Minister said, adding that both men believed the overspent, badly thought-out defence budget bequeathed them by Labour was an “appalling mess” and a “complete car crash”.

With the coalition’s strategic defence review under way at a time of extreme spending pressure across the board, Mr Cameron said: “I’m confident we can make this work, but of course it takes difficult decisions.
“But be in no doubt, this PM is pro-defence, pro-armed forces, passionate about what these people do on our behalf.
“Sometimes people forget just how capable our armed forces are going to be. We are currently building the most capable frigates anywhere in the world – these are being delivered right now. We’re having hunter killer submarines that are the most technologically capable piece of kit.”

Mr Cameron also disclosed that more Chinook helicopters would be provided for British troops in Afghanistan, although he would not give the precise figure.

“We will give everything to our troops in Afghanistan that they need. We’ve already doubled their operational allowance, sent in more counter IED teams – the level of equipment is increasing all the time.
“We’ll go on having one of the largest defence budgets in the world, we’ll make sure our forces have the equipment they need and make sure they’re properly set up to meet Britain’s interests in the world.”
...
"very good chat" is PM speak for a firmly delivered spanking. "difficult decisions" probably means a practical end to Britain's Blue Water navy, that is apart from the "technologically capable" bits needed to secure the nuclear feathery hat. And he'll scavenge what he can from the remains of an already measly defense budget to keep the ISAF alliance commitment stuttering along just like the last bunch of chaotic cheese paring scoundrels while blaming them furiously. Not one of Dave's stronger moments I'm afraid.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#18
If I read the article correctly, Cameron's 'radical' plan is to do pretty much nothing. The helichoppers wasn't his or the Conservative's idea, he's just proceeding on a course already set. 'Everything the troops need in Afghainstan' is merely proceeding along a course already set by the previous mongs. Having one of the world's biggest budgets for defence (not as a proportion of GDP) is merely re-stating what is already the case.

I'm rather struggling to understand if there's anything different from the previous administration, let alone 'radical' - unless he's using the term to reconnect with yoofs'n'ting by using handy buzzwords and not wearing a tie - yeah, cool blud, radical, d'ynowhatahmean?
 
#20

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top