PUBLIC SPENDING/DEFENCE REVIEW - WHERE TO CUT ?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by agoodgrouping, Sep 21, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. All parties admit they are going to target the public budget in the run up to the General Election, Tories say they willl protect NHS and Overseas Aid.

    Easy MOD targets are civvies but ......they have always been with us and nothing changes.

    So then, REALLY big savings - Trident, Eurofighter (or whatever), FRES, carriers

    Quote today 'Treasury contacts suggest CEA must be reconsidered in light ...etc'

    So equipt and/or CEA - where do you think the MOD should Find the extra $ ?

    G2
     
  2. Trident should go (£20 billion isn't it?), and we probably wouldn't use it anyway, even if the septics let us. Carriers need to stay, and £1 billion has already been spent on them anyway so now it is whether the government would now spend £1.5 billion each for two aircraft carriers (as they can't get the money which has already been spent back),probably a worthwhile investment. Eurofighter will probably be scaled back. FRES will probably be scrapped and a new system put in place. Ideally though they'll do a white paper and match the commitments needed (some dream eh?). The odd thing is that almost every single other country is raising defense spending to cope with the recession in order to create more jobs through public spending, France even placed an order for a new Mistral class. Also with a long-term war in Afghanistan, rising piracy off Africa and a range of other deployments a rise in defense spending is justified to cope with that. The tories have also been banging on for a long time about how labour have been unsupporting etc. (too right), so they can't replicate that themselves, and they've also pledged to match spending to commitments, and as they are fully supportive of the war in Afghanistan then politically they don't have much of a choice other than to do just that, match spending to commitments and thus raise the defense budget. Having said that, there's no way that's going to happen and they'll presumably find a way to wriggle out of it...
     
  3. Off the cuff I'd say:

    Reduce number of QUANGOs

    Reduce number of MPs and Lords

    Reduce number of NHS and Education 'mid-level managers'

    Make MPs submit reciepts for ALL expenses monthly (the rest of us have to don't we?)

    give me a minute while I cool down
     
  4. The tri-service community would do well to make lots of small savings, not just the big things like carriers and nukes. As someone has rightly mentioned Civ-Servants would be very high on my list. The other area where big savings could be made is to get rid of some of the private contractors currently deployed in Afghanistan. Not sure of the figures, but apparently it costs up to 100,000 to keep a full screw in service regardless of where said screw serves. When you take into account Barracks SLA/ SFA loa wages uniform trg burden etc etc it can't be that far off of the mark. WTF do high ranking officers think it is cost effiecient to then keep said full screw in Bks twiddeling their thumbs while a contractor (usually ex full screw) deploys to theatre in their place at huge cost (I think the figure mentioned was in the region of 50K).

    "ahh BPS666 why are the lads starting to sign off again?"

    "dunno sir, probably because they can't get on tour and if they go and work for the contractor that you pay to do his job he gets nearly double his wage!"

    "mumble mumble bayonets mumble mumble politically capped mumble mumble mumble"

    So in my blinkered view I could make a saving of about £1M and employ tradesmen in the job they joined up to do rather than stagging on and marching up and down the square outside the bosses house. This only takes into account what the civvies get paid so the contract is probably worth at least this much again. Good thing is it was them good all Civ Servants that put the contract in place!
     
  5. Disband the RAF and let the Army and Navy do the the jellywopter, and fast jet stuff ....... save loads on hotel bills, but Gordon's Gin stock shares may take a dive :)

    J
     
  6. Simple approach:

    Buy back editions of the Guardian. Go to jobs pages. Identify any jobs with word:eek:utreach, gender, facilitator, integrated. awareness, inclusive, multi-cultural, counsellor, co-ordinator, lifestyle, etc, etc etc. Get rid of all the jobs identified, transfer savings to Defence.

    In MoD, re-deploy anyone involved in Media Ops, IiP, performance and target monitoring, gender/orientation awareness issues. Scrub all ceremonial duties for 2 years to facilitate surge to ops. All MoD Plod duties handed back to RMP, local police or Mil Guard Force as appropriate. Do a proper review of the cost-effectiveness of military CSS functions compared to contractor support - I've been on both sides and know which is more effective and lucrative for me - a sound analysis is needed to confirm my gut feeling.
     
  7. You're doing fine. The Quangos bit though - by reduce I suspect you mean "get rid of totally". £64 Billion saved. Up Defence Spending and as herrumph alludes to above anything involving an -ism, an -ist or anything smelling vaguely of Socialist twaddle - do a Dalek on it.

    Job's a good 'un!
     
  8.  
  9. No exactly the opposite. Much as I like contractor rates of pay I believe most functions are done better by serving military. No profit margin and excessive rates of pay. More military also allows reasonable harmony rates and quality of service on exercises, in barracks and ultimately on ops.

    Contractorisation is politcally motivated because Civil Serpants and politicians don't like large standing army.

    Due to your misunderstanding of what I didn't make clear your job application is rejected!
     
  10. Scrap overseas aid, slash education and NHS budgets as a large chunk of their budget goes on form filling to prove they've met New Liebours 'targets'.
     
  11. pml!

    Now if you could just get PJHQ et al on side. Heard via a 3rd party that a certain Director thinks contractorising CSS is great because it frees up the lads and lasses to do sexy stuff like marching up and down the square and patrolling the green line! It might look sexy in the corps rags but sexy to me is seeing the lads and lasses getting stuck in at the business end of the supply chain, conducting CLP's and the like and actually "fighting logistics through". Still, I only pay taxes and don't really mind giving it to someone who doesn't pay tax to do my job for me while I sit and try and get my head round how we ended up in the state we are in.
     
  12. They are all the same, the Tories recently announced that the ONLY two areas of public expenditure that would NOT be cut would be the NHS and Overseas aid. We now have the MOD budget at approx £42 billion and I don't see any Govt raising that much in the future. So to fund future kit/pensions etc we will have to have internal 'house-keeping' across the three Services - each with their own agenda.

    Cost of Trident replacement (full life) was £32 billion in yesterday's Times, that looks prime. Also, each Eurofighter costs the same as an Inf Bn for ten years (same source). Cost of CEA - £200 million a year, one fifth of the allowance budget for less than 8000 claimants, suggest that as most of the RAF & RN families spend all their careers in UK they will have to use state schools or pay the cost of private education themselves ?

    Less litigation would also be useful !
     
  13. "Contractorisation is politcally motivated because Civil Serpants and politicians don't like large standing army."

    Fantastic - what an absolute belter of a statement, with no proof to back it up!

    To save money, you have to ask some hard questions about what you want Defence to do, and then how you can cut force numbers to reduce costs. Service personnel are very expensive in terms of capitation and support costs, so to make real savings, you have to reduce your staffing levels. I see a move away from HM Forces to contractorisation because its so much cheaper in the near term - I know there are massive issues with contractorising facilties, but when you can get rid of a Cpl on 30K plus allowances and replace them with a civvy on 17-20k with no allowances, then savings soon mount up.

    For the Army, I would ditch the RF structure, and have all Bdes answer to 2/4/5 Div. I'd also take a long hard look at all NATO postings and other 'sunshine' posts and ask what they contribute to Defence. I suspect that anything which doesnt help us achieve success on current Ops will rightly be in the firing line.

    I'd downsize Abbey Wood to a point, but accept that too much downsizing means instability and not enough staff to bring projects in. Personally I'd extend procurement tours by 1-2 years, and get the armed forces to accept that a 2 year tour doesnt set you up for life as a 3* as head of procurement, and that to get it right, you need to spend your time buying stuff, and not doing "broadening appointments". Sorry, bit of a bug bear that we get great staff in, but just as they are professionally competent in post, we move them on again.
     
  14. Isnt it £20 billion over its lifetime some 20yrs?
     
  15. In reference to my bold - I refer you to your own spurious statement

    Fantastic - what an absolute belter of a statement, with no proof to back it up!

    Are you saing that contractors can carry out the core function of CSS. Because if you are, I think you are talking shit! What do most of the CS's contribute to operational success in theatre at the moment. Bedding storeman in blankshire for example! The point made was a direct reference to contractorisation not CS's but seen as you brought it up about how you great you all are.

    "Where the fuck is the replacement for my equipment which is nearly 50 years old you bunch of money sucking cunts!"

    time and again CS's trot out the same old line about it slipping to the right due to funding etc etc etc Utter bollocks the money was given and set aside and lo and behold it was subsumed into another budget by a CS so just fuck off the lot of you! Waste of fucking time and couldn't write a ****ing simple contract that delivers if your life depended on it! Leeches!

    If you are all so fucking great go and get a real job in the private sector.

    edited to add that the civvies replacing Cpl's in theatre do not get paid 17K either they are erning well in excess of 40k in some cases so your theory doesn't add up, because the full screw is sat in camp picking winnits out of his arrse and wondering why he isn't doing the job he signed up to do. Strike him off strength? Gonna get a contractor to turn up on the start line at 0430 with his cam cream and gun are you? for 17k my arrse!