Labour's plans for the Forces

These two charts are the Govt spend and Tax receipt predictions for 2020-2021 from the OBR. Expenditure is £928Bn and receipts are £873Bn. You can see that there's a deficit between outgoing and receipts of £55BIllion, even after the best part of a decade of "austerity" - and BEFORE C19 kicked in.

govt spend 20_21.jpg


GOvt receipt 20_21.jpg


There are still some who think health, pensions and welfare are paid by National insurance. I'd suggest the numbers say otherwise. Until someone finds a way to dramatically increase tax take (probably by magic, as you're looking at something like a 25% hike in income tax or 100% hike in corporation tax receipts) we need to have a very hard look at our expectations for state support. Four budgets (Social protection, health, social care and education) account for 66% of government spending - worse, 70% of tax receipts.

The next two biggest are EU contributions and debt interest, both just bigger than the defence budget. One at least disappears off the ledger soon, but that's the scale of the problem. Yet talk to your labour-supporting friends and they think its all just a matter of forcing evil tax avoiders and corporations to pay more and all will be wonderful......
 
Yeah I suspect the poor fxxxker has to cut 'n paste that bollox in, like his Tory opposite numbers have to burble on about private sector efficiency.

The point is the total manpower, oops, personnel figures. Pretty stark.


On tbe BAME thing, l had a bad tempered Twitter conversation with some clowns whining about the Trooping the Colour being so white. I pointed out that the Welsh Guards recruit in Wales which is 94% white so the smattering of black faces was fair enough. The regional recruiting system obviously affects representation of BAME in the Army, as London and Brum make up the preponderance af non-white UK people but not the preponderance of recruitment.

Different for the fish-heads and crabs, but interestingly overall the Army is within a percent or two in line with overall UK ethnic numbers.


I rather doubt that. Vetting isn't based on misinterpretation and distortion read in the Express. It's based on susceptibility to blackmail or adherence to ideologies inimical to British security.

McDonnell would struggle, I think Jimmy Corbett (was that his name?) would have been ok.
Is not Commonwealth recruitment intended to put black faces on parade?
 
Tom Watson MP was saying as far back as 2014 when he was Shad Defence Sec that we needed to start worrying about the Russians. SKS, I think, might lean into that a bit as part of reassuring everyone he's got his shit in one sock.
 

Lola18

Crow
These two charts are the Govt spend and Tax receipt predictions for 2020-2021 from the OBR. Expenditure is £928Bn and receipts are £873Bn. You can see that there's a deficit between outgoing and receipts of £55BIllion, even after the best part of a decade of "austerity" - and BEFORE C19 kicked in.

View attachment 485945

View attachment 485946

There are still some who think health, pensions and welfare are paid by National insurance. I'd suggest the numbers say otherwise. Until someone finds a way to dramatically increase tax take (probably by magic, as you're looking at something like a 25% hike in income tax or 100% hike in corporation tax receipts) we need to have a very hard look at our expectations for state support. Four budgets (Social protection, health, social care and education) account for 66% of government spending - worse, 70% of tax receipts.

The next two biggest are EU contributions and debt interest, both just bigger than the defence budget. One at least disappears off the ledger soon, but that's the scale of the problem. Yet talk to your labour-supporting friends and they think its all just a matter of forcing evil tax avoiders and corporations to pay more and all will be wonderful......
I haven't known that these diagrams even exist
 

Slime

LE
Tom Watson MP was saying as far back as 2014 when he was Shad Defence Sec that we needed to start worrying about the Russians. SKS, I think, might lean into that a bit as part of reassuring everyone he's got his shit in one sock.
While that is true, he also supported the fantasist ‘Nick’ who accused Lord Bramall of things such as peadophilia and child murder.
He also remained Loyal to the shadow cabinet who publicly stated they would sooner believe Russia over the Salisbury poisoning than the UK police or SIS.

A certain SKS was also part of that shadow cabinet.
 
Unfortunately, the order of the paragraphs likely signals the order of importance given to each issue by the Nosferatu lookalike.
What are you insinuating?

 
Last edited:
@Not a Boffin - aye, the 1998 SDR was arguably the last one worthy of the name. It came up with a balanced solution and George Robertson did a fair job.

If only Blair had held Brown's feet to the fire in terms of funding it - and that's before the former's foreign adventures are taken into account.

Labour might not like it but there's quite some justification in the assertion that many of the forces' current ills still rest with Labour, even a couple of terms of government later.
I agree. And at the same time, as many a politician has rightly said "the first duty of Government is defence".

Shrugging shoulders and blaming the last lot is an ineffective tactic against incoming ordnance, cyberthreats or strategic pushes by malevolent States.
 
It's more intended to "get faces on parade, we don't care whose" I think. Recruitment is not a total success these days.
Yes, given the contractor, from what I hear, and some family input, has done anything but put off recruits. Post Covid with large rise in unemployment and few job opportunities for this years school leavers and graduates, would expect Army recruitment to become 'a target rich environment', with no need to trawl overseas.
 
These two charts are the Govt spend and Tax receipt predictions for 2020-2021 from the OBR. Expenditure is £928Bn and receipts are £873Bn. You can see that there's a deficit between outgoing and receipts of £55BIllion, even after the best part of a decade of "austerity" - and BEFORE C19 kicked in.

View attachment 485945

View attachment 485946

There are still some who think health, pensions and welfare are paid by National insurance. I'd suggest the numbers say otherwise. Until someone finds a way to dramatically increase tax take (probably by magic, as you're looking at something like a 25% hike in income tax or 100% hike in corporation tax receipts) we need to have a very hard look at our expectations for state support. Four budgets (Social protection, health, social care and education) account for 66% of government spending - worse, 70% of tax receipts.

The next two biggest are EU contributions and debt interest, both just bigger than the defence budget. One at least disappears off the ledger soon, but that's the scale of the problem. Yet talk to your labour-supporting friends and they think its all just a matter of forcing evil tax avoiders and corporations to pay more and all will be wonderful......
I'm not sure many would claim we spend money on things that shouldn't have money spent, but most are uneasy about how it's spent.

Example: social protection includes housing.

Aftef the seismic changes in social housing, many Government supported tenants are in private accommodation. This costs multiples of the old council house system, to no increase in the utilitu to recipients (arguably the opposite).

Result: more tax money spent on a worse service. Who benefits? Why, private landlords like me!

Dismantling some of the crazier ideology/false accounting driven ploys of the last 30 years might balance the books a bit. Mr. Brown's PFI shenanigans for a start.
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
I think that there's some justification in the line that most Tory cuts are due to coming into government after Labour and having to balance the books.
I was in hospital the week of the 2010 election. I'll not forget an expert stating on live TV that Labour had so destroyed the economy that it would take ten years to recover. Whichever party got in would likely lose in 2015 and be out of power for two terms, because of the cuts they'd have to make to try and stop the economy collapsing.. Thank God Millipede and Corbyn fought the next two elections.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I was in hospital the week of the 2010 election. I'll not forget an expert stating on live TV that Labour had so destroyed the economy that it would take ten years to recover. Whichever party got in would likely lose in 2015 and be out of power for two terms, because of the cuts they'd have to make to try and stop the economy collapsing.. Thank God Millipede and Corbyn fought the next two elections.
Tory cuts. Austerity's a lie. Get with the plan, man.
 
It was the John Nott defence review that precipitated the Falklands War. Then in my experience (joined up 1981) the Tory party played a particularly unpleasant game with pay where they would "accept" the AFPRB recommendation but would implement it in 2 stages over a 12 month which gave them significant saving both immediately and also for the poor sods who got to 22 years and pension in the 1st half of the financial year and hence did not get a "full" pension. They'll say all the right things and then...…. Even as a Matelot I will quietly point to Kiplings "Tommy Atkins" as a guide and baseline.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Is the long-term Conservative bluff that they're the party of strong defence about to unravel like their bluff about law 'n order?
No.

Some years ago at Shriv on JSWOC I was somewhat surprised to be told that historically Labour have provided "more" funding to HM Forces than the Tories. Whilst technically correct using proportion GDP figures from 1945 to 2007, digging a little deeper I later found that this was without taking into consideration any related governing factors (withdrawal from Empire, economic performance etc). Lies, damned lies and statistics indeed.

Who would you rather have as Head of the government in time of War: the Party of Churchill & Thatcher, or the Party of Wilson, Foot & Blair?
 
Tom Watson MP was saying as far back as 2014 when he was Shad Defence Sec that we needed to start worrying about the Russians. SKS, I think, might lean into that a bit as part of reassuring everyone he's got his shit in one sock.
I'm pretty sure that the Kiddy-Fiddler-Finder General was never shadow on Defence. Sir Starmer will only say things against the Russ in terms of either "they wanted Boris" or "they're very nasty to the alphabetti-spaghetti community and we should write to the UN".
 
I'm pretty sure that the Kiddy-Fiddler-Finder General was never shadow on Defence.
Agreed, although Watson was a Defence minister (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State) for a few months in 1996.
Sir Starmer will only say things against the Russ in terms of either "they wanted Boris" or "they're very nasty to the alphabetti-spaghetti community and we should write to the UN".
Disagree:
 
No.

Some years ago at Shriv on JSWOC I was somewhat surprised to be told that historically Labour have provided "more" funding to HM Forces than the Tories. Whilst technically correct using proportion GDP figures from 1945 to 2007, digging a little deeper I later found that this was without taking into consideration any related governing factors (withdrawal from Empire, economic performance etc). Lies, damned lies and statistics indeed.

Who would you rather have as Head of the government in time of War: the Party of Churchill & Thatcher, or the Party of Wilson, Foot & Blair?


.... just leave that there for you.
 
Top