MoD funding shortfall/ABC 17

How can we be undermanned in both the Regulars and the Reserves and still be underfunded as well, that must take a special kind of cuntery of Dianne Abbott proportions........
Because the wages bill is a shit load of money but the equipment bill is bigger
 
How can we be undermanned in both the Regulars and the Reserves and still be underfunded as well, that must take a special kind of cuntery of Dianne Abbott proportions........
Hmmmmmm.......accounts all squared away, defence looking good until a year ago. What could have happened to change the sums?

Right about the last part, very special. It was forecast.
 
How can we be undermanned in both the Regulars and the Reserves and still be underfunded as well, that must take a special kind of cuntery of Dianne Abbott proportions........
We are funding our capital purchases by restricting recruitment (ie wages)
 
If we are supposed to have X amount of people then surely the funds should be there for X amount of people? If we only have Y amount of people then where has the money gone that should be funding X amount of people?
 
If we are supposed to have X amount of people then surely the funds should be there for X amount of people? If we only have Y amount of people then where has the money gone that should be funding X amount of people?
Because the wages bill is a shit load of money but the equipment bill is bigger
We are funding our capital purchases by restricting recruitment (ie wages)
1) Because the money for X people left over from only having Y people gets spent subsidising other stuff
2) Defence spend doesn't just go on wages, there is equipment, a giant estate, an army that does things and consumes spend while doing them
3) The Treasury knows that there are less people and that the wages 'surplus' gets spent elsewhere
4) The Treasury keep reducing the Defence budget with 'savings'. These savings have to be fulfilled by spending less
 
So on the off chance we ever become fully manned we couldn't afford to be, that's genius accounting that only the MoD could come up with............:pissedoff:
 
Underfunded means not going to have as much money as is wanted.
Overspent is having spent more than you have.
OK, then.

If I spend more than I earn, am I overspent or underfunded?

And if the Army has projects/commitments/activities that are underfunded - well, who decided to restrict the funding?

No point grizzling about Treasury if the decision is one made by an Army CoC trying to fund (so to speak) a Champagne lifestyle on the beer income which has been allotted.
 
Last edited:
Having had the deep joy of visiting 7 MOD bases in the past 6 weeks, I am totally overwhelmed by the amount of wasted money in getting the simple & basic stuff done. Even the most basic building repair contract costs 3 - 5 times as much as the equivalent work, possibly done to a better standard, would cost in civvy street.

Part of this is the sheer inefficiency of the contracts and the additional costs which MOD and RPCs force upon contractors to comply with overly complex contracts and endless paperwork plus compliance with (in many cases) outdated MOD standards.

One particular simple building repair job that I am aware of went through 4 levels of sub-contractors, each putting their mark up on the top, at least one of the markups being in the order of 25%. The ultimate sub-contractor was p!ssed because they were then told that they needed to get their operators security cleared which takes 6 - 8 weeks before commencing the work plus the attendant time for paperwork and physical attendance at an RPC office to have their documents verified.

In the outside world, the same contract works would have cost 30% of the cost to MOD and been done in a quarter of the time.

I have no immediate solution to this, these are just my observations.
 

Glad_its_all_over

ADC
Book Reviewer
Look at defence spend outside the UK, consider the collapsing pound and that we pay our suppliers in euro or US$.....
 
OK:
In Land the Military wages bill is approx. 50% of spend, 57% with Military & Civilian, excluding the equipment bill under DE&S.
Under Defence as a whole, and under cost communication / delegation Military & Civilian wages approx. 32%, equipment nearly 60%

In the context of this thread Defence is underfunded in ABC17, and Army are pointing out that the Navy & RAF take big slices for their equipment.
 
OK:
In Land the Military wages bill is approx. 50% of spend, 57% with Military & Civilian, excluding the equipment bill under DE&S.
Under Defence as a whole, and under cost communication / delegation Military & Civilian wages approx. 32%, equipment nearly 60%

In the context of this thread Defence is underfunded in ABC17, and Army are pointing out that the Navy & RAF take big slices for their equipment.
Which is nice.

I believe the mantra is "The Army equips the man, the RN and RAF" man the equipment". Strangely I've only ever heard that from Army Officers justifying large numbers of Army personnel and a concomitant equipment programme.
 

jim30

LE
Which is nice.

I believe the mantra is "The Army equips the man, the RN and RAF" man the equipment". Strangely I've only ever heard that from Army Officers justifying large numbers of Army personnel and a concomitant equipment programme.
Quite, and the problem of manpower and equipment has for years been that the Army is roughly 20000 more than we need or can afford to equip- hopefully the election manpower pledge will help!
 
It's OK, Land has come up with a cunning financial offset plan, it wants to offset costs for all the stuff it provides to the other two services, especially Dark Blue, against their respective budgets. Cue hoots of laughter from the light and dark blue financial head sheds.
 
Article in JDW this week, noting that the SDSR15 CS manpower reduction plan has not only failed, but failed biblically. The reduction of 15000 heads has not been achieved. Indeed, there has been a small increase, which means the £9.5Bn savings predicated on that reduction will have to be found elsewhere.

Now personally, I think the CS reduction was half-witted populism based on a "MoD pen-pushers dining high on the hog while stitching up Our Boys" meme that bears little - if any - resemblance to reality. But it does not bode well for a budget that is already stretched - something which will not be obscured however many times the mantra "increasing defence budget/£178Bn Equipment Plan" is parroted by Fallon and the half-witted Harriet.
 

jim30

LE
Article in JDW this week, noting that the SDSR15 CS manpower reduction plan has not only failed, but failed biblically. The reduction of 15000 heads has not been achieved. Indeed, there has been a small increase, which means the £9.5Bn savings predicated on that reduction will have to be found elsewhere.

Now personally, I think the CS reduction was half-witted populism based on a "MoD pen-pushers dining high on the hog while stitching up Our Boys" meme that bears little - if any - resemblance to reality. But it does not bode well for a budget that is already stretched - something which will not be obscured however many times the mantra "increasing defence budget/£178Bn Equipment Plan" is parroted by Fallon and the half-witted Harriet.
To be fair it was always going to take longer to occur (and dont forget that sdsr period is out to 2020) because it was an unexpected present. A cynic would say the lack of a VERS programme didnt help either, as previous reductions underpinned by VERS managed to meet a five year reduction goal on the first year.

Add to this the reality of wafting a hand lazily and going 'fire 15000 civil servants' without knowing how or why is never going to go as planned. Its as if the EM, following a session at his Jermyn St tailors decided to try out his pinstripe suit and bowler hat during the last SDSR...
 
A decade of kicking the CS is paying in spades now. Even the most faithful dog will bite of you kick it often enough. The current boring down through our actual day to day costs by the chaps and chappettes from PWC hasn't gone quite as planned either. Really? It will cost that that much to outsource these tasks?
Make the CS lean, mean and commercially competitive? Better start paying the going rate mate.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top