Coming as no surprise will be the news of rumours of yet more cuts, reductions in Army numbers post 2015 and Tornado’s being the headline grabbers this week. As the MoD wrestled with Planning Round 11 it became obvious that the SDSR announcements were not going to be enough and yet more reductions would be inevitable. Various leaks and titbits have been surfaced but the fat lady hasn’t started her solo yet and if there is anything certain, it is that there is more bad news to come.
The real bad news will surface when PR11 has been finalised, right now the MoD is looking down the back of the sofa for a few quid that might have been left over from the last diversity seminar.
The Guardian is reporting that options include yet more surface vessels to be withdrawn, Army personnel reduced, reduction in the mythical Chinook order and the early withdrawal of the entire Tornado fleet. There will be a range of options presented these might well be on that list.
The MoD responded
SDSR implementation work is ongoing and the MOD is also undertaking its annual planning round, which is used routinely to look forward over ten years and ensure the Department’s commitments are in line with available resources. We keep a range of options under consideration at all times regarding future capabilities. Premature speculation is not helpful to that process, to our Armed Forces or to industry.
So, let’s not speculate or discuss eviscerating the armed forces because it might be unhelpful to them.
In a world of hard choices I think withdrawing Tornado earlier might well be the lesser of several evils. It is currently the only aircraft cleared for RAPTOR which is providing a significant capability in Afghanistan but there is no reason why other coalition aircraft could not use the pod (the Polish and Greek Air Force use RAPTOR on their F16’s for example) and the small number in theatre would seem to make them vulnerable. Close Air Support and ISTAR could be provided by other coalition partners and there is no doubt that even after compensating BAe and Rolls Royce for early termination of aircraft and engine sustainment contracts there is soem serious potential for savings that would relieve pressure on other areas.
Withdrawing Tornado early might even allow some funding to be found to accelerate integration of systems like Paveway IV, Brimstone and RAPTOR onto Typhoon. Now that the deal to sell RAF Typhoon production slots to Oman looks a bit wobbly the need to keep Tornado because Typhoon would not be available in sufficient numbers might not be as acute.
Also in the news recently is Liam Fox planning to deliver a speech to the think tank Civitas in which he will address the issue of budget over runs in major projects.
For years successive defence secretaries have failed to get a grip on the equipment programme and failed to hold the department and industry to account for delays and poor cost-estimation
These practices in the MoD would simply not be tolerated in the private sector, and they will no longer be tolerated in the MoD
Whilst there is an obvious need for the relationship between industry and the MoD to change and for the MoD itself to change I think the elephant in the room for major projects is politics and politics, is something that politicians need to sort out. In various news reports that trail the speech some of these major projects that are over budget are highlighted, including Astute, CVF, Typhoon and A400.
Anyone who has even a passing familiarity with these projects will fully understand the political dimension is the source of the serious cost over runs so we can all witter on about BAe and DE&S all day long but it will not make one brass farthing of difference to major project costs.
Political interference is the biggest source of acquisition buffoonery so unless, Liam, you can sort that one out, I suspect in 5 or 10 years time we will be planning yet another reappraisal of our relationship with the defence industry and bemoaning ineptitude at the MoD.
“Political interference is the biggest source of acquisition buffoonery so unless, Liam, you can sort that one out, I suspect in 5 or 10 years time we will be planning yet another reappraisal of our relationship with the defence industry and bemoaning ineptitude at the MoD.”
Very much agreed.
I agree with the political interference angle (= delays, ordering equipment for employment reasons, etc), but you can also add inter-service rivalries and trade-offs (‘I will support F-35 if you support FRES Scout’) and the arcane complexity of the decision making process in MOD Main Building, Abbey Wood and the Treasury. There are far too many senior officers and civil servants involved, each determined to get their fingers in the pie in order to justify their employment. Add to that the vastly disproportionate number of senior (and very expensive) officers and you have an organisation that seems more about the preservation of career structures and the pursuit of correct process than producing real defence outputs. Let’s have some fundamental reform, not tinkering around the edges.
TSR2 and CVA01 all over again.
The RAF killed CVA01.
The government killed the TSR2.
And then the F111 too.
The UK, navy, Raf and industry all lose.
The RAF killed Ark Royal.
The government kills the Tornado.
The UK, Navy, RAF and industry all lose.
What amazes me, however, is the sheer amount of fucking-up. Nick Harvey, after the conclusion of the SDSR, announced IN PARLIAMENT that 96 Tornado GR4 were to be retained.
The SDSR itself promised 12 new Chinooks and a 2020 Army of 98.000 soldiers.
They also announced again and again the Merlin transfer to the Fleet Air Arm, and another rumour is that the transfer itself is increasingly at risk.
They announced a 40% cut in armour and we get rumors of retaining just 50 Challenger (!) while losing CVR(T) and FV430 fleets all in one go. A 90% cut, more than 40%.
They must believe people is blind, deaf and stupid. I’m amazed to see a government even worse than ours here in Italy, sincerely.
It almost makes me glad we have Berlusconi, and this tells you how high is my opinion of the Con-Dem…
A couple of months after the SDSR, merely weeks away from announcements in Parliament, they are going to shred their own very planning and promises and fuck it all up…? Gods, it takes AN AMAZING courage. Or an EPIC lack of any shame and common sense. Possibly both things.
The SDSR, as i’ve said so many times already, isn’t worth the PDF document it is. I would never waste precious paper to print such a collection of useless ramblings.
They wrote it, to betray it in two months time.
Labour took twelve years to betray its own review… And they still delivered a lot of stuff, at least: the UK power projection capability, included the whole amphibious fleet, is admittedly a labour thing.
Major threat to the UK’s survival: HM Government. This is what the SDSR should have had as Tier 1 menace.
This is all disheartening but it is the inevitable outcome of decades of stupid procurement decisions. I know people are rightly angry and there have been many good suggestions for how the Armed Forces should be restructured but sadly at the end of the day I’ve yet to hear a realistic alternative as to how the £36 billion black hole could have been closed without sacrificing any capability the cuts were inevitable.
The people who to my mind have emerged with the least credit from this debacle have been the service chiefs who instead of trying to work out a coherent strategy have behaved like a bunch of bitchy schoolgirls trying to put one over the other services.
The nation and our frontline personnel deserve so much better!
actually, the main document talks of reducing the army to 95,000 by 2015:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf?CID=PDF&PLA=furl&CRE=sdsr
The Future Force 2020 document only talks of numbers in relation to 2015:
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Factsheet5-Future-Force-2020.pdf
As does the army document:
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Factsheet7-British-Army.pdf
anyone who did not realise that army numbers were being propped up by afganistan is crazy, at great expense we kept the carriers which should tell you something about the intended direction, as should the bald stated intention to only support one brigade on enduring operations, hardly a COIN doctrine!
“…the MOD is also undertaking its annual planning round, which is used routinely to look forward over ten years and ensure the Department’s commitments are in line with available resources.”
In terms of defence policy, surely that should be the other way round – the resources need to be in line with the commitments?
Gabriele
“Labour took twelve years to betray its own review… And they still delivered a lot of stuff, at least: the UK power projection capability, included the whole amphibious fleet, is admittedly a labour thing.”
Bollocks
Labour just didnt admit their Defence Review was a load of rubbish.
Labours Strategic Defence review is freely available on the internet, see what they promised, and what was actualy in service by 2010.
Labour’s 1998 SDR was actually a very good piece of work. The problem was that Gordon Brown refused point blank to fund it and therefore began the gap between funding and procurement that culminated in the £36Bn black hole. Yes they were major C@%& ups within the procurement process but as Jed said at the beginning, interference by politicians is also a major factor. It is very difficult to run a programme when you don’t know if the money for it will still be there tomorrow or the next day. This Government though is actually worse, as after all its statements about defending the Realm it has made and is still making decisions based purely on the grounds of cost cutting, with no regard to maintaining capabilities or balance within the Armed Forces.
The rank and file should down tools and stick two fingers up to the Generals and MPs until a proper strategy based review is carried out, with funding ring fenced for whatever the outcome so that it matches the committments laid down by the Government’s policy.
I make no apologies for the shower that preceded this shower but the evidence is there in terms of equipment and percentage of GDP spend, plus there was George Robertson, Des Browne and John Hutton who were pretty competent, I even think Bob Ainsworth had a fair crack.
There is no doubt, at least in my mind, of the need for serious budget cuts to redress the deficit, make the UK economically stronger and therefore more secure all round. I equally think the answer to the MoD’s problems is not always more money or even expansion but a serious matching of aspiration with wallet instead of the fundamental deceit that is ‘adaptable Britain’
If the strategy is wrong how can the tactics be right?
Lord Jim
Indeed, Labour gave a brilliant wish list, followed by defunding and denial.
The Tories offered a horrible truth.
I make no secret of the fact that I’m standing as a Tory in the next local elections, nor that I think Cameron is a Cock and Fox a Coward, the SDSR was shit, but it was a huge improvement on what preceeded it, if only in that there was some small chance of it actualy making it in to reality.
Would you like the truth or something beautiful?
“make no secret of the fact that I’m standing as a Tory in the next local elections”
news to me!
Well, I dont finish every post with it, but I have mentioned it.
Gabriele, I believe TSR was cancelled by the Government at the behest of the Americans who saw it as a direct threat to their troublesome F-111. I’ll have to check my facts but I’m sure it was because of our economic woes back in the 60′s. The Americans offered a bailout but at the cost of a number of projects including the TSR 2 and the Shorts Belfast, we bought the C-130 instead. In both cases we destroyed the jigs to prevent further manufacture.
One poignant thing I picked up last night on the news coverage of the Libyan crisis was the ex-Foreign Secretary Lord Owen saying that NATO should impose a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent its air force from bombing the civillian protesters and that those member states with aircraft carriers should send to the Mediterrainean to support it. Hmm….Harriers would be quite useful in this situation….DOH!
the ex-Foreign Secretary Lord Owen saying that NATO should impose a no-fly zone over Libya
Good grief. Can we at least finish with one of our Middle East wars before we start another? (Yes, imposing a no-fly zone would be an act of war.)
Richard, not the Harriers we had, remember GR9 had only the most basic of Air to Air capability. If NATO wants to interdict Libyan airspace then the best way to do it would be from established bases in Southern Europe, not aircraft carriers
TD
I was thinking much the same, bases in Italy and Spain would be far more effective than CdG and PoW
The GR9′s would probably be outclassed by the Libyans, although the Sea Harriers should be winning BVR engagements.
Eurofighters should be picking up aces if anything contested.
Why exactly should NATO be pitching in on the side of the rebels anyway?
DominicJ,
So you are standing in local elections,we are impressed.
Mmmm Dom, I am starting to see the political spin already….
“the SDSR was shit, but it was a huge improvement on what preceeded it, if only in that there was some small chance of it actualy making it in to reality.”
Erm… how exactly was it better than what preceded it ? Not talking about the Iron Chancellors refusal to fund anything defence related, but exactly how was SDSR any better than any reviews which have preceded it.
Yes the SDSR was a load of BS, so we at least agree on that, but is not the small chance of actually making reality disappearing rapidly over the horizon already ?
Surely the current HMG being a coalition is even less likely (able) to make real tough decisions than a large single party majority ?
You think SDSR was bad? You ain’t seen nothing yet!
PR11 is going to be brutal. I will go so far as to say that I expect the cuts made (which I highly doubt will get any real publicity unless people do a lot of FOIing) will destroy the UKs ability to operate as a medium military power once HERRICK is over.
Its game over time gents, the chickens have come home to roost and we are about to cease to matter on the world stage. At its most simplest its because Gordon didnt fund it, and we also managed to spend 10 years refusing to accept the reality of our equipment programme train wreck, while simaltaneously being refused permission to cancel Cat A projects on doctrinal / electoral grounds.
You couldnt make it up if you tried!
jed
precisely because the previous one was defunded.
A bad reality is better than a pleasant fantasy.
Thats what we’ve got.
I disagree with much of the sdsr, but we’ll get most it.
Compare that to the sdr that called for two super carriers, twelve cruisers, twenty four frigates, 250 typhoons, 160 f35′s, foas (remember that!).
As i said, the sdsr isnt what any of us wanted, but we can expect most of whats in to progress beyond the power point stage.
Even if we’ll end up with a weird, broken force. we at least know what it will be, and have a fair guide of whats going to happen
TD,
not the Harriers we had, remember GR9 had only the most basic of Air to Air capability. If NATO wants to interdict Libyan airspace then the best way to do it would be from established bases in Southern Europe, not aircraft carriers
Right on the Harriers. The GR9 would have not been much in air policing tasks.
But of course, the Sea Harrier was better than RAF’s contemporary fighters, and it had to vanish. “How come the FAA flies better stuff than us! Sacrilege!”
As to the bases factor, that is just because no one in Europe has got decent carrier-borne aviation, save for CdG and its Rafales that however are busy in the Indian Ocean already.
To fly long CAP patrol flights over a No Fly Zone extending well into Lybia from the “bases” in Sicily (not many left…) you’d need a relatively huge number of air tankers for AAR. Which would have to stay well over the sea for safety, possibly inside of “boxes” that surface warships could protect with their missiles.
And it might most likely still prove impossible to patrol all of Lybia’s sky without getting a base in Algery or Egypt… and that might prove more than a tad complex at the moment, for obvious reasons. Range and endurance of each patrol would be very serious issues: carriers sailing close to the coast of Libya would have a massive advantage.
You know how things could get really interesting, really fast…?
If Ghaddafi starts keeping western people as hostages. He did it more than once in the years, already, and in situations less desperate than the current one. Today several nations, from Portugal to Italy to Austria, have sent in C130 airplanes to start and pull out people. The Austrial C130 was left stranded on the ground by the denial of permission to take off for a few hours already. Now it seems flights continue… but what happens if the civilians are effectively taken as hostages?
I read that there are 3500 britons in Libya, and italians, french, lots of people. There’s ample room for serious trouble to happen. Bengasi’s airport is already off limits after being bombed no less. A couple of Mirage fighters landed in Malta after their pilots were ordered to bomb the rebels and escaped…
Can it get nasty? My answer is: it is already.
DominicJ
Why exactly should NATO be pitching in on the side of the rebels anyway?
For roughly the same reasons of the Kosovo UN intervention. Libya is bombing the rebels in a true civil war, killing hundreds. If it gets any nastier, intervention might be a real alternative, and Italy, being the closer one, is already in alert. The UN already talks about War Crimes and there might be a Joint Declaration in a matter of hours. Not a resolution yet, but things are already moving.
DominicJ
Bollocks
Labour just didnt admit their Defence Review was a load of rubbish.
Labours Strategic Defence review is freely available on the internet, see what they promised, and what was actualy in service by 2010.
You misunderstood me. I’ve been horrified by Labour on defence.
Fact is, the new government is scaring me even more than labour did. Their only answer to the budget crisis is “GUT THE ARMED FORCES, BUY CONDOMS FOR UGANDA! AND FUND RAF’s PROUD PROGRAMME TO SEND LESBIAN PILOTS ATTENDING TO THE NEXT GAY PRIDE TOO!”. Hardly what i expected, thank you.
But if you think that the answer to the Uk’s problem is scrap the whole Tornado fleet, retire most of the Army’s vehicles and cut some more ships out of the navy, well… Go right ahead.
What will the coalition procure for defence? The 7th C17? Oh, DOH! It came from earlier. The Armed Forces will never recover from the cuts it is suffering now. If even the targets sets barely months ago by this very government are betrayed already… by 2015 the UK will have armed forces consisting of one Rapier battery, one RHIB with 8 Marines and 12 soldiers with a Land Rover.
@jedibeeftrix
Not exactly. SDSR 2010, page 32, low left corner:
We will also, for now, assume that by 2020 we will require a Royal Navy of 29,000 personnel, an Army of 94,000 and an RAF of 31,500.
Now we already talk about 80.000. Gee, it truly was a “for now” load of bull then.
DominicJ
I disagree with much of the sdsr, but we’ll get most it.
Do we really?
12 new Chinooks — > likely not to be
40% reduction in Challenger II and 35% reduction in AS90 — > rumors tell another story
Merlin transfer to the Commandos — > reportedly already at risk even after Harvey promised it more than once in the last few weeks.
Ice Patrol Ship — > HMS Protector. If she does not get killed by the new cuts before even being leased.
96 Tornado — > (SDSR had no precise number but Harvey announced the 96 figure shortly after) down to 60, possibly just 18 not to look bad by leaving the guys in Stan without anything flying over them in cover, in the worse case none.
Should i continue…?
Because there’s not much left. Even the Warrior upgrade and even the FRES SV contracts reportedly hang in the balance. The only (for now) safe project seems to be the Type 26, that (thanks God!) seems to be gaining international interest from Brazil to Australia to Canada.
you cant really be comparing 12 chinooks to a medium bomber fleet and 200 fighters?
The sdsr was honest.
The truth was horrific, but it told that horrific truth.
If the coalitiion has decided to cut the tornado fleet to fund typhoon upgrades, its finaly made a decision i can support.
Accepted, the Harrier wouldn’t be the aircraft of choice for a CAP, but Gabriele got there before I did. Long range CAPs from Italy aren’t ideal either, and is there a gurantee that the Italians would co-operate anyway, as its not a direct threat to Europe, Italy or NATO? I’m sure the Italians wouldn’t say no, but you get my point. IMHO Harriers, despite their limitations, supported by E-3 Sentries and given the clear blue skies over the desert would be better than nothing.
Don’t forget that they would be up against Mirage F.1′s, Mig-23′s and Su-22′s, radar equipped but not state of the art.
Hi Gabriele,
Could you please link me to the correct document, my linked document has nothing in the lower left (or right) of page 34.
Thank you
JBT
Well another project to add to the list those 8 “special chinooks we couldnt in cloud” which had a digital cockpit, ripped it out at several hundred million put analog one in and will as part of the fleet upgrade rip that one out and put another digit one in. How do we keep ending up with the most expensive things in the world I wonder!
I think now its about time to separate the procurement budget and operational budget and ensure you cant rob one to pay the other. Capability should not have to be removed to pay for procurement f**k ups its a scandal.
Without wishing to open up the harrier – tornado argument if the rumours are right and tornado is not needed in afghan then harrier should have been saved and the saving difference between the 2 should have covered the current black hole.
@Jedibeeftrix
Page is 32, not 34. Point 2.D.8, Personnel Transition part of Point Two – Defence chapter. The document should be identical for everyone, i do not think there were successive versions at all, so you just need to go back two pages to find it.
Anyway you find the SDSR document here on the MOD website: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf
And i checked. That phrase is still definitely present.
@DominicJ
you cant really be comparing 12 chinooks to a medium bomber fleet and 200 fighters?
As a matter of fact, i do. They are both lies (if the Chinook deal really gets cancelled), pure and simple. And pointing out which one is bigger does nothing good to anyone. Also, we do not get 200 Typhoons, but we still get them. As a matter of fact, none of the four countries will get as many Typhoons as originally planned.
As a matter of fact, the US themselves are not getting 780 F22, nor the later figure of 330, but 187.
Not to justify anything, but in a 20 billion fighter jet programme spanning over 20 years, changes are expected.
Cancellation of the buy of 12 helicopters for a (relative) handful of millions two months after promising them… well, it is worse in many ways.
Cameron himself promised those chopters more than once.
And that is both what shocks me… and supplies me hopes. Generally, i try and hope that the programmes on which politicians have exposed themselves so much will be relatively safe.
Unless they really know no shame at all.
@Mark
Without wishing to open up the harrier – tornado argument if the rumours are right and tornado is not needed in afghan then harrier should have been saved and the saving difference between the 2 should have covered the current black hole.
Ironically, that was (according to the press and some top brass in interviews) the plan that was going to be… Until the last moment scramble of RAF officers that somehow managed to turn Cameron on their side by axing the Harrier instead. The Navy was rightfully furious at that, if you remember.
thank you Gabriel.
@Jedibeeftrix
My pleasure.
Well. Pleasure… it would be pleasure if we were talking of good news for once! Only thing that heartened me a little lately has been the chance of Ark Royal surviving as an Heliport in London.
Not what She should be doing… but hell, it totally, utterly beats seeing her wasted and scrapped.
Hi Gabriel @ 6:25,
RE “Should i continue…?
Because there’s not much left. Even the Warrior upgrade and even the FRES SV contracts reportedly hang in the balance. The only (for now) safe project seems to be the Type 26, that (thanks God!) seems to be gaining international interest from Brazil to Australia to Canada.”
- yes, you should have continued as the list has ‘this mercurial quality’ and anything that has been on this site (anywhere near the whole list) is totally out of date; but you are not the editor, so OK
- more importantly, both Australia and Canada have gone the refurb-way to keep the hull numbers up, and those programmes will be over a number of years, so it is Brazil to watch – and they are being induced by promises of sharing the design (requirements feeding into it) which is no bad thing!
RE ” the chance of Ark Royal surviving as an Heliport in London.
Not what She should be doing… but hell, it totally, utterly beats seeing her wasted and scrapped”
- there are Russian carriers (not the ex-Varyag) doing casino duty in China; so the that’s in-between heliport-duty and scrap (did the French carrier ever make it to the Indian beach, for the latter?)
Gabriele
Buts thats not whats happened.
The SDSR has been updated as and when decisions were made, and those decisions were made on a relevent time scale.
The Coalition decided its probably going to cancel the 12 remaining chinooks. We found out, days after that decision was made.
When was the Typhoon order cut, officialy?
Or the JCA order?
The last government went into the election claiming it was still going to order 232 typhoons and 130 something F35B’s.
160/50 has been a pretty clear number for a long long time.
The only example I can find of the last shower being honest is the T45, which was cut in 2003, and again in 2006.
Everything else was just, “we’ll buy it next year”
Adendum
Just to be clear, I have no tribal loyalty here.
Since I spend my saturday mornings trudging through snow, hail and rain delivering leaflets or reaching to those unfortunate enough to have opened the door, I think I have more right* to be pissed off when the higher up’s I’m in effect doing it for screw up.
The SDSR was woeful, that I’m making a stand on honesty ought to show just how woeful it really was, but my point remains, it was a vast improvement on what preceeded it.
*If you currently are being, have been, or will in the future be shot at or blown up in Afghanistan, you have more right to complain.
@DominicJ
The Coalition decided its probably going to cancel the 12 remaining chinooks. We found out, days after that decision was made.
We found out because of rumours on the press. The government (labour, con, libdem, whatever the hell) always says “we are reviewing a range of options. Nothing has yet been decided.”
Similarly, on JCA. Has the current government been any clearer than labour on numbers? No. We know we (should) expect (around) 40 planes in 2020, with a long-term target still touted at 80 or even as high as 100.
The navy is still expected to be “part of the JCA joint effort”, but that is all we know. Will 800° NAS survive? Will it have planes or just provide crews? What about 801°? Why the hell the RAF is trying to gobble up carrier aircrafts for itself? All questions without answers.
@ArmChairCivvy
As an update, even Turkey is interested in the Type 26 and expected to sign an agreement that will include collaboration on the new frigate.
As to Canada and Australia, by 2020s they will have to replace their ships, actually: their upgrades are aimed at a 2020/2025 life for their ships, but replacements will eventually have to come online by then and interest in the Type 26 seems real. (Canadian shipbuilders are already terrified that the future ships might be built in the UK, and have been making lots of noise along this week).
As to other cuts i can think of to add to the list:
-Even the recently ordered Reapers announced by Cameron for 124 millions have appeared between the investments at risk. Unlikely they get cancelled, but you never know. And anyway, the order is merely a follow up on the original Labour order (back in 2009 i think) that called for 10 drones. Only around 5 were actually acquired for lack of funding. Two were lost, and current numbers are not clear.
The new order has not been specified in terms of numbers, but it will be basically a purchase of the Reapers not acquired back then, so possibly other 5. (compatible with the 124 millions figure) Total RAF fleet might be around 7 if the order survives. (which also fits in the “we will double the RAF fleet of Reapers that, i think, numbers 3 or 4 right now)
-Another possible cut might come by 2015 is Devonport itself. If the 7 Type 23s left there get transferred to Portsmouth for real in 2014, the base will be ridiculously empty and left without a real reason to exist and probably will close. (submarines are already all moving to Faslane, after all)
So, yeah. Lots of bad news.
@ Dominicj – “Since I spend my saturday mornings trudging through snow, hail and rain delivering leaflets or reaching to those unfortunate enough to have opened the door, I think I have more right* to be pissed off when the higher up’s I’m in effect doing it for screw up.”
I can relate, active for a party here in Swansea; not impressed with the UK leadership. In fact, when it comes to defence I’m not impressed with any party.
Dom – good on you for taking your stand, and yes you are being very honest about it, and your political activities.
My point, which seems to be the same as Gabrielle, is that SDSR is no better than what preceded it, and Cameron and his Govt are not better than what preceded them. All current politicians of whatever persuasion are middle of the road toaddies, “yes men” who rule by opinion pole and have no long range goals other than the next general election. OK, maybe not all, because maybe your not like that Dom, and maybe, eventually you could be an MP, and then PM !!
Our political elite think television is only for appearing on. They think only “little” people watch it.
Shame they are not watching what is happening in the Middle East.
Lucky the 2 Libyan Mirages that landed in Malta were not hostile. Malta has no fighter jets. If Malta was attacked , would Britain, that gave Malta the George Cross, stand by & do nothing?
Egypt has over 200 F-16/Mirage 2000. Well within range of British bases in Cyprus.
If there is trouble in Algeria/Morocco/Tunisia, then it is not impossible that Gibraltar could be threatened.
Given these new threats, was it wise to scrap HMS Ark Royal,her Harriers, the Nimrod & Sentinel?
Cutting numbers of Tornados & Typhoons, could leave us exposed.
I thought Gordon Brown was bad, but the coalition is a huge let down.
They need to cut EU contributions, DfID & PC non jobs. Then spend the money on defence & energy security(nuclear power stations).
Jed
Again, I see two parts to this.
The first, is our wish list
The SDSR was a big let down to anyone who held out a faint hope that the Tories were going ride in a Chellenger 3 and save the day.
But from a reality check point of view, its been a good thing.
Ok, we wont get MPA, but we now know that, we wont get MPA.
“OK, maybe not all, because maybe your not like that Dom, and maybe, eventually you could be an MP, and then PM !!”
You may remember I’ve mentioned that I have friends who are Candidates, aquaintances who are MP’s, and even phone numbers for whips. But I’ve never divulged names.
Gordon Brown will be Prime Minister of the UK again before I make it past the selection board.
This Government has made cuts in the Defence Budget it didn’t have to, as money could have come form elsewhere. In addition they seem to be able to find the odd £1Bn here and there when they need too.
Right up until the election they were rubishing the previous Governments record on Defence and saying the country would be safe in their hands. The excuse that they didn’t know how bad the books were until in office doesn’t hold up either.
At least the previous SDSR has a basis in strategy and foreign policy, the 2015 SDSR was purely a cost cutting measure with additional cuts being made under the public radar. Instead a spin smokescreen is being laid repeating the rightly claimed errors made in the MoD concerning procurement but no mention is made of Government instigated delays of funding changes.
As has often been said the money is there but not the political will to use it. Instead they are wearing blinkers composed of Afghanistan and the deficit with no consideration of anything else.
The Armed Forces suffered year of starvation, gradually being worn down by the previous Government. This Government has decided to put a bullet in the Head of the Armed OFrces and kill them off as quickly as possible as an effective force of teh size and composition needed by this country to meet its needs and comittments.
ITS ALL ABOUT EUROPE
my thoughts on future cuts for what it’s worth:
http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/sdsr-part-deux-%E2%80%93-further-reductions-to-come/
Lucky the 2 Libyan Mirages that landed in Malta were not hostile. Malta has no fighter jets. If Malta was attacked , would Britain, that gave Malta the George Cross, stand by & do nothing?
Malta’s an independent country. It’s not part of NATO – it actually kicked out NATO and the British Army in the seventies. It’s part of the Commonwealth, but that doesn’t involve any defence agreement. It declared itself a republic and got rid of the Queen as head of state.
Basically, Malta doesn’t want us to defend it. Why should we?
I have similar sentiments on the piracy issue; we’re supposed to be spending millions to protect ships that are registered in Panama? Registered there specifically to avoid UK taxes and safety regulations? Your ship gets into trouble, call the Panamanian Navy. This is freeloading.
Dom – apologies for really drawing this out…..
Ref: “But from a reality check point of view, its been a good thing. Ok, we wont get MPA, but we now know that, we wont get MPA.”
Firstly, I don’t see the positive aspect of this. OK, so we know we have lost a capability – so we are no longer hanging on the edge of our seat fretting about what we don’t know. Hardly a silver lining is it ! As my mother would say “two wrongs don’t make a right”…..
Secondly, and more importantly the reason HMG has lost all credibility is that they are engaging in very dangerous double speak and spin. To use your example cutting a single platform that provided a number or capabilities (and potential additional capabilities) and then peddling complete BS about how certain gaps would be filled in the light of the cut DOES not mesh in anyway whatsoever with the strategic rhetoric of the SDSR and the claims it makes as to what the Government wants the forces to be able to do.
That is not excused by saying “this next five year period is all about balancing the books and then we will have another SDSR in 2015″ (….and everything will get better, honest….).
Labour SDR = good, but Labour Treasury = bad for not funding the strategy / vision. We can clearly see the problem and who to blame.
Con /Lib SDSR = bad, full stop. It now appears that either the whole cabinet is complicit in perpetrating a big lie (sorry “perception management initiative”) OR that there are real splits within the coalition and even with the Conservative party (i.e. between Fox and Cameron ?).
Either way, to my mind that is worse than the Iron Chancellor flatly refusing to fund anything other than his socialist dream; at least he had principles and he stuck to them !
I agree 100% Jed, we all know the deficit needs gripping and we all know the MoD is a basket case that has been living beyond its means for much longer than this or even the last government. It seems to have passed a lot of people by that most of the real acquisition cock ups are projects from the last conservative era.
It is the underlying bullshit that grates more than anything, if we are to slash the armed forces because of financial reasons then fair enough, slash away but as you said, lets not be trying to kid everyone we can still maintain an effective expeditionary capability, or Adaptable Britain, because it aint fooling anyone
It comes to something when we look back at the Gordon and Tony show with fond memories
Jed/TD
But the SDR was NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN
It was written to look good and sound good. It was not a road map for the future of the armed forces.
It was political point scoring bullshit.
If you think the UK would have been better served if the SDSR had said “we’re going to build 6 nuclear powered super carriers and a base on the moon”, and in reality, we got what we got, well, we’re just going to have to disagree.
“Hardly a silver lining is it ! As my mother would say “two wrongs don’t make a right”…..”
Not much of one no. We’ve moved up from woeful to bad.
“Either way, to my mind that is worse than the Iron Chancellor flatly refusing to fund anything other than his socialist dream; at least he had principles and he stuck to them !”
I’m afraid I cant praise a man who sent soldiers to die and refused them equipment.
I’m rather surprised you can.
“It seems to have passed a lot of people by that most of the real acquisition cock ups are projects from the last conservative era.”
The Labour government had 13 years to fix things. I remember once hearing a tale, a gentleman had landed in Kenya, got in a taxi and was being driven to his hotel. He remarked to the driver the road was looking rather worn.
The Driver remarked that it was the fault of the English, they had built it abnd built it badly, some 30 years previously….
If in 15 years time, the Conservative Government is complaining its labours fault, I’ll make exactly the same case, you’ve been in charge long enough to clean up any mess from the last lot.
“It comes to something when we look back at the Gordon and Tony show with fond memories”
The whore might tell you your the biggest she’s ever had, but your still waking up with the clap.
Again, I dont think the SDSR was perfect, I dont even think it was good.
It was however, the truth.
And the truth is always better than a lie.
The SDR and its children were not the truth, they were lies, lies are not better than the truth, no matter how nice they are to hear.
I think thats what you are not getting Dom, it wasnt the truth, thats Jed and I’s complaint
It just said carry on normal jogging but with less stuff
No strategic reappraisal, no fundamental change in anything, just a shrinkage with some veneer of strategy on top. That strategy being ‘punching above our weight’ ‘adaptable britain’ and all the other platitudes that seem to come so easy to politicians (present company accepted of course) but in practice mean dead soldiers, sailors and airmen
It is the fundamental dishonesty that I find hardest to swallow
OK, absolutely my last comment on this Dom, as I am sure the other children in our school yard are getting bored…
1. When did Brown ever deny a piece of kit which would have saved lives ? Brown, himself, actually stop or veto a programme ? I seem to remember a bunch of idiots in last Gov thinking we were going to be doing Balkan peace keeping in Helmand. I also remember stupid Generals at various points saying we did not need MRAP’s or we did not need more Helo’s.
I am not blindly supporting Labour versus Conservative with that argument, just saying, if you have facts to back your assertion please point me to them.
However, your last paragraph is where we really fall out as its probably the biggest load of tosh you have ever written. I don’t mean that as personal insult, your probably a very nice guy I would buy a pint for (even though I will never be a Tory supporter).
“It was however, the truth.
And the truth is always better than a lie.”
That was the whole point of my last post – I don’t think there is an iota of truth in the SDSR ! I don’t know if it was planned as pure spin from the start, or if the incumbent regime really was surprised by the truth when it got its hands on “the books” – mind you even if it was, there are choices to be made and other things can be cut. So the cynic in me suspects SDSR was a white wash from the beginning. If you think because it says there are tough times ahead and there are going to be cuts, then its being truthful, then we must agree to differ. There is no black and white , no Jedi versus Sith, no truth versus lie, there are only shades of grey, interpretations of fact – and to me SDSR was murky, mucky grey from the very beginning. Now unfortunately it seems to be further along the spectrum towards BS / spin (i.e. Lies) than it was towards reality (i.e. truth).
Just my opinion, I don’t expect you to subscribe to it
@DominicJ
But the SDR was NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN
Not really true. Said this way, it is a bit excessive.
The SDR would have happened (mostly, at least) if the government hadn’t sent the armed forces in not one but TWO major conflicts abroad and decided to fund both wars from the core budget.
Had the two wars funded separately, by the Treasury “Contingency” voice like in any normal nation and any “normal” war situation (as normal as a war can be) and not from the MOD’s core budget, we probably would have gotten all what the SDR promised.
As to the SDSR2010, my point is: if it was TRUE, it wouldn’t even be that bad. Considering the objective crisis moment, the budget, the overspend and everything… The force structure in the SDSR 2010 was not bad.
Point is, we are not getting what the SDSR announced. More cuts are already on the way, and devastating ones very possibly. This is what really sounds wrong.
And don’t tell me “but there’s a one billion overspend to tackle in the next year’s budget”, because if the country can give away 8 billions in aid, of which one to India, and spend on countless other things that will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER match Defence in the order of importance, it means that a billion for the MOD could be found at any time… IF THERE WAS THE WILL TO DO IT.
By the way, HMS Cumberland gained a life-extension: she was steaming back home to be decommissioned, but events in Libya spurred her redeployment in the area.
First creaks in the “strategy”.
Just hope nothing else happens that requires digging the Ark Royal and a bunch of Harriers out in a hurry next!
Or maybe hope it is necessary…?
I’ll admit: such a contingency would mean some serious trouble, danger and probably people dying, so i can’t exactly say i hope for it… but on the other hand, having the Ark Royal back while there’s still a chance for it might save the country from even worse trouble later on.
1981 teaches.
@ Gabby
You are right about finding money if it is needed. I also see it on more simplistic level. I see an Astute, I see a billion pounds. I see the International Development fund and I see what? (And yes I know what HMG says the money goes on.) I see our EU contributions and what do we get? Them giving us a tiny portion our money back, while the likes of Spain build roads with the remainder, and then spend their own taxes on LHDs, Aegis frigates, etc. etc. UK is the fifth biggest economy we should be able to fund our armed forces.