Treasury hits the nuclear button...?

#3
Seems down now: there was a lot going it seemed - managed to go through it once.
 
#4
The link seems gubbed ?
Link now fixed..

Opening statement...

"More than £250 million will be stripped from the armed forces' £880m allowances budget in a series of purges ordered by the Treasury.

Perks for senior officers, such as payment for chefs, cleaners, drivers and gardeners, will also be slashed and military personnel of all ranks will be asked to make personal financial contributions to some allowances such as those which cover travelling from home to work.

Defence chiefs have accepted that the cuts are likely to cause a "bloodbath" within the military. Senior officers warn it could seriously damage troop morale. "

I would suggest that "Senior Officers" are probably right...!
 
#5
If only everybody due all the allowances claimed them,that cost would be alot higher. Took me till my last three years to discover all I was due!
 
#6
#8
That is ****ing typical! Great news..
 
#9
A Good Buzz - it was due to be announced last week, but the PM wouldn't sign off on it. Said it required "more work". I'm not sure if that's good or bad!
 
#11
I suspect this will be very bad news indeed. That bad that they will wait until after christmas, so as not to send the troops on leave on a downer!! There are lots of rumours and much speculation on this website, we will just have to wait and see however my gut feeling is that it will be pain for all.....................
 

Boldnotold

LE
Book Reviewer
#12
Come on, how is the nation going to fund third homes rented by MPs who are letting out the second homes we paid for, if we don't get the money from those who can least afford it?
 
#13
Come on, how is the nation going to fund third homes rented by MPs who are letting out the second homes we paid for, if we don't get the money from those who can least afford it?
Hilarious.
 
#14
First post - from a submariner on an Army site - 'Joint' is bliss!

Seriously though, an interesting thread and I fear about the consequences of this review of allowances. What makes it more difficult to accept, is that this is an internal review, presumably undertaken by serving officers within DCDS(Pers), which would appear to overlap with and undermine successive AFPRBs. These have been accepted by Governments of all persuasions since the early 1970's. The review would appear to be amending and altering Terms and Conditions of Service as well as the myriad of Service Allowances.

It appears to have been rushed through, was about to be announced to serving personnel, but has not survived first contact with Ministers. I am appalled by the way in which, it would appear, they are going to radically reduce/overhaul the allowances. Whilst I am not an advocate of Unions or militancy, if this were the Civil Service there would also be consultation with Professional Bodies and Unions - so who is representing the interests of each and every sailor, soldier and airman?

I suspect there could be unintended consequences of tinkering with, reducing or removing Specialist pay, Get You Home pay, LOA, CEA et al. We are NOT MPs or indeed Joe Public, members of the Armed Forces forego much of what is taken for granted by civilians, so we should not be treated in the same manner. If George Osborne is staggered with the rates of Specialist Pay he should get off his shiny warm treasury seat and visit some Servicemen.

I await with baited breath, the presumably toned down (and more politically acceptable) version of the review of allowances.
 
#15
So lets have a guess at what will be cut under the allowances review. Here is my prediction:

1. CEA chopped for all new applicants & rules tightened for those currently in receipt.
2. LOA chopped by 50% (best get rid of the tax free car) with total scrapping by mid 2011.
3. HDT max distance drastically reduced.
4. Specialist pay stopped after 2 years in a 'desk job'.
5. Like the Americans made to pay for our own uniforms - but no allowance.
6. IE scrapped.

Like I said I am no expert!! Expect those in Middle-Management & Senior levels to PVR/Sign-off in droves - hence saving the MOD paying out redundancy payments. Anyone else like to add?
 
#16
It's all very well tinkering around with allowances to save money in the short term but the Law Of Unintended Consequences has a habit of costing more money further on down the line.

For example: a SNCO lives 50 miles away in his own property and claims HDT for his journeys to and from work. HDT is then radically altered if not scrapped altogether. Being out of pocket he then decides to save money spent on fuel, and asks to move into the Mess and travel home at weekends (as he is fully entitled to do), obviously he would be claiming GYH if eligible. However, a number of other SNCOs have decided to do the same thing and consequently the Mess is full. The Army is under an obligation to house it's personnel so the aformentioned SNCO (and others probably) is granted authority to live in SSSA and claim HDT (after all he is not living there by choice), FIA and GYH. Not to mention the rent on the property. So for the sake of saving a few pence, the MOD then has to shell out hundreds of pounds.

I would suggest that this is not an unrealistic scenario judging by comment in my Mess recently and I bet ARRSErs can think of loads more.

Berlin
 
#17
So lets have a guess at what will be cut under the allowances review. Here is my prediction:

1. CEA chopped for all new applicants & rules tightened for those currently in receipt.
2. LOA chopped by 50% (best get rid of the tax free car) with total scrapping by mid 2011.
3. HDT max distance drastically reduced.
4. Specialist pay stopped after 2 years in a 'desk job'.
5. Like the Americans made to pay for our own uniforms - but no allowance.
6. IE scrapped.

Like I said I am no expert!! Expect those in Middle-Management & Senior levels to PVR/Sign-off in droves - hence saving the MOD paying out redundancy payments. Anyone else like to add?
Probably not a bad prediction. Maybe a little bit more phasing in (or out) of certain allowances to dull the pain....
 
#18
Come on, how is the nation going to fund third homes rented by MPs who are letting out the second homes we paid for, if we don't get the money from those who can least afford it?
Don't forget the five million quid a year that goes to subsidise the 17 restaurants and boozers in the Houses of Parliament. Wouldn't want the honourable members getting peckish or thirsty.

And you can hardly blame them for subletting their property empires. Since the great unwashed had the audacity to criticise their Lords and Masters for, well, theft, some MPs are struggling to keep their income in six figures. A hundred grand a year is not unreasonable compensation for somebody like my MP who gave up a high flying career on the dole to serve democracy.
 
#19
The only thing that would raise my morale right now is a Trident launched at the Treasury.
Two of us with the same plan!

How was it that Mrs Thatcher, aided by a wholly apolitical CDS - Adm Sir Terence Lewin, and his 'fire-eating', savagely blunt and determined First Sea Lord: Adm Sir Henry Leach; managed to recover the Falkland Islands with a War Cabinet that had NO Treasury representative in it?

The Army too were well led at the time by Gen Sir 'Dwin' Bramall. (Sadly for the RAF there was too much cloud / sea / light / dark / wind / cold / heat and other 'obstacles' - (RAF Harrier pilots however, did their bit embarked on aircraft carrying ships - remember them?)).

The twerp Dave needs to remember that he, until the next General Election at least, is First Lord of the Treasury and he would be well advised to kick arrses and get solutions not only problems from the shiny suited mandarins occupying the Treasury offices.
 
#20
I like this bit of the OP ref:

"Defence sources have revealed the review will also bring to an end the payment of allowances which currently do not require receipts, such as the cost for meals and fuel during trips away from a serviceman's base."

I am no expert when it comes to expense claims but afaik, the only claim not requiring some form of auditable receipt is Incidental Expenses ie £5 a night in the UK when away from parent location. For the sake of equality, can I assume that the honourable members of the House of Lords will also have to provide receipts for expenditure against their daily allowance which I recall is circa £300 (no receipts required)?

Is it me??
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top