Defence Secretary warns of impact on capability.

E

EScotia

Guest
#5
I think he has a damn cheek. He's been party to the cuts throughout and now says:


"I shall go into the spending review fighting the case for the defence budget on the basis that we have made very large cuts to defence, we've done that with the collaboration and co-operation of the military," he said.
"Any further reduction in the defence budget would fall on the level of activity that we were able to carry out - the idea that expensively bought equipment may not be able to be used, expensively employed troops may not be able to be exercised and trained as regularly as they need to be. "I am not going into the spending review offering any further reductions in personnel."

So the military collaborated and co-operated in the cuts did they? A bit hard for the top brass to do anything else but comply with government direction otherwise they could be accused of sedition! He may also go into the spending review not offering any more reductions in personnel but has said he may offer "efficiency savings", a covert term for yet another budget cut for the armed forces if I've ever heard one and the bit about expensive troops I've put in bold and underlined hints quite clearly at an attack on terms and conditions!!

Duplicitous bstard


 
#6
He's said it, whether he can actually do it or not is another matter.
 
#8
Further reductions to military spending will have a significant impact on its capability, warns Philip Hammond.



Defence Sec: Cut Welfare Not Troops


Too little too late?

Too little too late by a country mile. I wonder what underlying reason there is for this? I sense some ulterior political motive. Perhaps after the tories poor showing in the Eastleigh election Cameron is about to have his Ceasar in the senate moment, although what adavantage this statement would give Hammond, i confess, i know not.
 
#9
The spineless turd speaks with forked tongue, methinks? In one breath he says how the Forces can't stand anymore cuts and in the next one he slips in how he could make a few more teeny weeny ones if he has to.

Anyone remember TCH? Even he wasn't as shite or as untrustworthy as this smart Alec numpty.
 
#10
He, like all other members of his party, can't really make unequivocal statements.

They're in coalition. They require the agreement of their partners to sustain a majority, without a majority all they can do is bluster.

I think he needs to shush. Even if he is correct.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#11
He will be told to Foxtrot Oscar and will meekly go back to MoD and try to look all tough.

Edit to say - Maybe that has already happened and he is in 'tough' mode!
 
#12
Dunno what all the fuss is about. If every serving soldier and officer gave just 10% of their wages to protect their future prospects then there would be no need for cuts.
 
#13
He is after all a politician. Those on welfare will now be at odds with the military, very good for votes in middle England. might get a few Lib votes.
Back in reality the PR dept has been at work already, so expect austerity and more dues out on kit as the treasury recoups all those UOR spends and well why not cull 1XX units, must be cheaper than relocating them.
 
#14
It's clear the Tories are going to use UKIP 'Soundbites' and will no doubt try to steal their policies. Fancy alienating your core voters by rabbiting on about Gay Marriage, Wind Farms and handing out tax payers money to rival countries and doing sod all about sponging immigrants and others. I see a Lib/Lab government next and a return to the UK open door policy for all god help us.
 

Grumblegrunt

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
We have a capability again! when did that happen and was it expensive?

I thought we sunk, scrapped and sold are capability years ago because it was supposedly out of date and cheaper to maintain than what we kept.
 
#17
The spineless turd speaks with forked tongue, methinks? In one breath he says how the Forces can't stand anymore cuts and in the next one he slips in how he could make a few more teeny weeny ones if he has to.

Anyone remember TCH? Even he wasn't as shite or as untrustworthy as this smart Alec numpty.
Possible. But at least he understands that THE MONEY HAS RUN OUT. And that it is time to wake up and smell the coffee. Most of the Armed Forces have not even begun to understand this yet. Maybe one day...
 
#18
Possible. But at least he understands that THE MONEY HAS RUN OUT. And that it is time to wake up and smell the coffee. Most of the Armed Forces have not even begun to understand this yet. Maybe one day...
This is the line trotted out Ad infinitum by No 11 but it's not actually true. We have one the world's largest economies and stacks of cash, the issue is how and where the government chooses to spend it. The coalition think (with reason) that the MOD budget is a great place to make politically safe savings, but recycling this 'no money' nonsense totally ignores the vast sums spent elsewhere -see the welfare bill and ring fenced foreign aid.

Of course the debt is an important issue but they are not actually dealing with that anyway. To do so would involve making the kind of politically brave (and therefore unacceptable) cuts that would dwarf any relatively minor savings they could make by crippling the MOD.
 
#19
Here's a thought,

In General.

How about cutting the welfare budget, reducing foreign aid but giving more money back to councils?

Then giving clear direction to the MOD on what is to be achieved with the resources we have.
One of the biggest issues we have is the inter service rivalry that comes to the fore and the blind faith of our bosses in 'we've staffed up a case to retain that under PR13/14'

Clear direction and no redundancies please, rationalisation of what we are expected to do and honest assessments by our leaders of what is in the art of the possible now and post Herrick. The TA plan won't work after contact with civilian employers but its still being pushed for.

The point of no return has been reached, morale has been affected and capability is reduced, service test anyone?

Yet our commanders are living in 24 month rose tinted offices praying it goes wrong only after their handover to some other lucky yes man.


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 

Grumblegrunt

LE
Book Reviewer
#20
I see one of the main issues being the constant outsourcing which is touted as being cheaper but it doesn't look that way from the cheap seats. you lose capability and end up paying more for the service when they have you over a barrel.

if they costed up PMCs vs troops I wonder how many billions would have been saved.
 

New Posts

Top