Shadow Defence Secretary John Healey has called for Britain to rearm, reinforce Ukraine, and put an end to military cuts.
Labour Shadow Defence Secretary John Healey called for the government to reassess its defence plans and increase military production in support of both Ukraine and the UK.
During a speech at the Institute of Directors, hosted by the defence and security think-tank RUSI, Mr. Healey addressed Rishi Sunak and advocated for British industry to manufacture weapons and ammunition to replenish the UK’s depleted stockpiles and to sustain efforts in arming Ukraine.
“The Defence Secretary himself conceded to me in the Commons last week, that ‘we have hollowed out and underfunded’ our forces. This is a frank admission of failure over 13 years of Conservative government. Time and again, visible capabilities – especially large expensive platforms which would only come into service in the long term – were given priority over effective capabilities needed for military use here and now. Time and again, a modernised warfighting division has been promised, but each time a decade away.
Today, the biggest risk facing the UK military is that large parts of it are underprepared for conventional conflict in Europe. Lacking spare parts, munitions and specialist personnel.
NATO is rightly doing what it can to avoid escalation to direct conflict with Russia. But deterring such escalation means we need to be prepared for it. So like 2021, alongside a new IR we should have a new Defence Command Paper. This must make clear how we meet NATO’s demand for greater force commitments, and should halt further cuts to the British Army. There is also the immediate need for a stockpiles strategy to sustain support for Ukraine and rearm Britain. Ukraine is depleting our military stockpiles, and the Government is acting too slowly to replenish them.
Take the NLAW anti-tank missiles that have been vital to Ukraine – it was 287 days after the invasion before the MoD got its act together and signed a new contract, with the first newly-made NLAW not due until 2024. We need to shift parts of our defence industry and MoD procurement on to an ‘urgent operational footing’, both to support Ukraine for the long-term and to rebuild UK stocks for any future conflict.”
In outlining steps he believes are necessary for the government to secure the UK, Mr. Healey emphasised the importance of prioritizing security in Europe, the Atlantic, and the Arctic, ensuring compliance with NATO commitments.
During his speech, he stated that a Labour government would undertake a “NATO test” within its first 100 days to assess the progress towards fulfilling Britain’s commitments to the alliance. As part of this assessment, Mr. Healey emphasised the need to halt further reductions to the army.
“Britain’s security strategy must be ‘NATO first’. The first priority for Britain’s Armed Forces must be where the threats are greatest, not where the business opportunities lie. This is in the NATO area – Europe, the North Atlantic, Arctic.
This is our primary obligation to our closest allies. After Ukraine, European allies will have to take on more responsibility for European security. The IR update must secure Britain as NATO’s leading European nation – which will be a Labour mission in Government.
It must outline the contribution the UK will make to NATO as it focuses on future Russian aggression, the Arctic opening up with climate change and a strategy to challenge and compete with China. And it must ensure our NATO obligations are fulfilled in full, answering the growing questions about critical capabilities that undermine the UK’s commitment to the Alliance – the size of the British Army, problems with AJAX, delays to Wedgetails, doubts about fielding a warfighting division.”
We will make the full speech available shortly.
As much as I despise the Tories for what they have done to the Armed forces. I wouldn’t trust Labour as far as i can piss. I mean just the other day the wankers revealed that when they come to power they will enshrine in law that Black companies will get preferential treatment regards government contracts.
https://i.postimg.cc/j2mkXFxW/Opera-Snapshot-2023-02-07-180520-www-theguardian-com.png
I can recommend an article on this subject in yesterdays Times, by Trevor Phillips, who speaks a lot of sense. And being originally from the Caribbean he knows what he is talking about, and has little truck with all this right on stuff.
On the speech by Healy, it’s all good words provided that he can deliver once he gets in to office, as I devoutly hope he does. But we shall see when reality strikes and he comes up against the Whitehall “blob”
He was taking a side swipe at CSG there with ‘expensive platforms’ and maybe at T26 too.
The thing is RAF get all green eyed at a £10Bn program and say we could have a fleet of 120 front line fighters for that.
Army get all green eyed and dream of 10’s of failed procurement projects. The issue isn’t that army hasn’t been given money it is that they waste so much by gold plating.
Take the land Ceptor system. They ordered a few after loads of R&D spent and it is all working and promptly say they want a longer range system. Which is great and would have been sensible if the upgrade was CAMM-ER based but that wasn’t the idea at the time. Problem with the long range idea was that without persistent ISTAR aircraft what cues the missiles? Well ground based battlefield radar can only see so far?
I agree with the side swipe idea, how would it look if Labour mothballed one of Gordon Browns make work schemes for his own constituency? Being honest I think that will be unlikely.
But we still have to get the military to be realistic about what they need and how to get it, and also to get Whitehall to think long term. As has been mentioned further down this thread the SDSR 2010 was quite frankly disastrous and even if all parties took the threat seriously it will still take a decade to get over it. Unless we get into a shooting war before then…..?
Why do we need carrier for Europe, Artic and North Atlantic? Large part of that will be covered by MPA’s and a2a refueling to extend range of smaller jets.
You could almost be John Nott.
🤣🤣🤣
You mean triggering a costly war by reckless defence cuts? John Nott & most defence secretaries?/CotEs for the last decade or several have been working at that.
Why don’t you ask the United States or NATO that question
You need carriers for everything. Aerial refueling was touted by the RAF but couldn’t do the job. Its why carriers were brought back.
I’m aware of that but when the government in waiting says we’re narrowing down the scope it changes what you need to deliver that scope.
Good point, now that the carriers are a sunk cost( no pun intended) someone is bound to ask how many P8/E7/drones/frigates etc could have been bought for the same amount.
A carrier is not for Europe it is for anyUK/NATO interest Globally. Forget insular Europe and start thinking World.
tell the shadow defence minister that.
That explains why there is do little Land Ceptor around!… Lol. Can’t believe the experts weren’t smart enough to figure out the range requirements beforehand. As you say CAMM-ER already exists and HVM/ Star Streak can all be ER’ed if required and with gun based Shorads in the mix. The ministers and purchasing buggers need to do their job properly and stop wasting so much time, money and resources! And where’s the oversight of all this?! Show some accountability and you’ll earn some hard earned respect.
*do… so
The tilt to Asia has been largely about gaining access to CTPp and a US trade deal. That’s what he is taking a swipe at. I don’t agree with him but CSG was long planned by previous labour government.
For areas he’s identified you could certainly cut the carriers and with that reduce escort numbers, leaving a few to cover the NA only, recalling OPVs from further afield to protect infrastructure also reduces platforms required.
And if you turn out to be wrong 30million people starve to death.
😉
Sorry explain the relevance to my comment.
In both world wars our enemys identified our maritime trade as our weakest point and tried and almost succeeded in cutting it. If we lose control of our seaborne trade routes the consequences would be among other things the loss of half the food we consume.The loss for industry would be even greater.
Nor arguing with that. You need ask the shadow defence minister as he’s the one proposing we only focus on North Atlantic, Artic and Europe.
Then just how do you propose to control the airspace over the sea so that trade is survivable? You can’t do it with land based air alone. If you cut the carriers the only alternative would be to massively increase escort numbers, particularly air defence ships and that would cost WAY more. The reality is we live on an island. To defend that you need a Navy and an air force. An army is a luxury for foreign adventures with a minor role in homeland defence.
We need more ships not less.
Dead easy to promise the earth in opposition, the difficult it is actually delivering.
uptick / like
And at the end of the day blatant ‘virtue signaling’ like that will lose them the next election
One factor that the Conservatives could focus on at the next election is just how fragile European peace could still be at that time. I doubt the Ukraine war will be fully resolved by 2024 and defence as a vote earner will have greater horsepower than at any previous modern General Election. The British people are acutely aware of the current balance of peace in Europe and whomever wins the election can not ignore these deep routed concerns. Labour still harbours members who would rid Britain of vital defence components without a second glance, and as such, could pose a risk to the UK. Just how disciplined the Labour leadership will be on containing these elements if they win we will have to wait and see. The new Trident subs will be vulnerable in 2024 as all four vessels will be in various stages of manufacture and would be easier to cancel than if fully commissioned. Obviously, the bulk of Labour’s front bench will not be advocating the cancellation of the new nukes but its costs and moral standing may have the ear of a greater number than on the Tory side?
Well the Tories have set a precedence with their leadership on a revolving door. Not hard to imagine some in Labour trying to manufacture a situation to displace Starmer. Given the past few years it would hardly shock the electorate. And crisis is used to ignore election pledges and we seem have several crisis’s a year these days 🙂
There was unity today in Westminster Hall and amongst them on all sides were politicians who have supported defence cuts that have resulted in the British Army shambles, yet they applaud the need and use of modern weapons in Ukraine. The British public needs to be informed just how bad the situation is in our land forces, with a majority of vehicles the same as their granddads used. Like all things in politics, issues are as transient as the weather.
Some say he’s as energized as a deflated party balloon! If so, the party may be plagued by the same revolving leadership door as the Tories, and God knows who will be defending our armed forces budget.
Mandatory reporting of pay gap isnt the same as giving preferential treatment to black led firms. We aleady require reporting of gender pay gap if you have over 250 employees (large firm) but that doesnt seem to be funneling contracts to female led firms? California and Illinois in the US require pay reporting if you have over 100 employees, California if your a mid sized firm with even a single Californian employee.
Watcher,
The first 2 paras from that Guardian article:
Black-led businesses could be given more support to procure lucrative government contracts by a future Labour government as the party refines its offer to ethnic minority voters ahead of the next election.
Labour’s race equality task force, led by Baroness Doreen Lawrence, hopes to ensure that black-led groups get the chance to access a fair share of the billions of pounds paid out each year through government contracts, according to The Voice newspaper.
Yes fair share and it discusses the reporting changes. Thats the opposite of preferential treatment. I know nuance may be hard to understand for someone who names their avatar for an X-men comic book villain and keeps posting white supremacist views on immigration and politics.
‘Keeps posting white supremacist views on immigration and politics’ He’s always smart and sharp as a razor. Half the time I agree with him but all the time he’s worth listening to. If you were a gentleman you’d know what you need to do. Let’s see if you do it.
What is “fair”.
What is the racial fair share of a basketball team players? or football?
Where you pick your team equally based on height😀
Watch,
That so called avatar which you presume to think I gained from a comic, is actually the name I was given at birth by my mother. She in turn gained it from a friend who had given birth 11 months before me and named her son ‘Farouk’ funny enough I never knew he existed until I went to Secondary school and due to his birthday in September and mine in August.We ended up in the same year.
You’re clearly not worldly as you’d understand the name is common in some parts of the world, which are incidentally are not ‘white’ regions!!!
Yes its an Egyptian name first used for the King of Egypt in 1920 then copied by others around the Middle East.
And how many know or care that the king of Egypt had that name?
Watcher wrote:
It never fails to amaze me how quickly the canard of the far right is brought out in which to character assassinate somebody who broaches a subject some find unpalatable .
1) I’m born British from Indian decent
2) I want to live in a country where everybody is equal
3) Promoting any one group over another is wrong. It breaks ups the bonds of society
4) Now look at Ireland , which this past week has seen a huge amount of protests (funny how the Liberal British media haven’t got round to reporting that) regards Immigration . That is what happens when Political elites push positive discrimination too far. We are seeing similar in Scandinavia. Now as a Brown skinned person I have far more to worry about, than a white bloke if the British people say enough is enough. Oh and want to know how the Taoiseach has reacted. He refers to the Irish people marching on mass all across the country as..Far right.
What? Are you lost in your own rabbit hole? Farouk is his name as far as I know and he’s not a white supremacist, he’s made a valid point for discussion. From my point of view I don’t even understand how a business can be decided as even black-led, the CEO is black or the board is black or main investor is black or biggest shareholder, or simple straw count of percentage Is not white, or they have a policy on no white employee? Its a baffling idea that only go wrong and divide. By the way I would apologise for the stupid remark on Farouk and have a word with yourself
The ‘chance to access’ and ‘support to procure…..contracts’ etc simply means they will be invited to participate and possibly be given guidance on demonstrating credentials etc, but ultimately whoever wins a public tender will need to have submitted the best offer as assessed against whatever criteria has been set down. The successful participants will have to win the business!
yeah….thats what happens ….
I suppose it depends on what the ‘criteria’ is of course.
They can do this today, any company can participate in government tenders. Just go to the government website view the tenders, and sign up to participate. Why should someone get guidance and support because of skin colour? Large numbers of companies participate without this support having never participated before.
Don’t disagree expat. Just providing an interpretation of the language quoted. Don’t believe it stated groups will be given contracts but that they would be helped to have the opportunity to compete.
Fundamentally I agree. Any form of discrimination based on colour/ethnicity etc is harmful to society
Pete,
I’m all for the best deal, contract, person for the Job. But this is 2023 and not only are we still having to deal with Backhanders, nepotism and corruption across Parliament , it is actually on the rise and in the case of certain groups it is actually defended and excused. Just look at Batmanghelidjh and Ngozi Fulani and how they both played the R card. (The latter is most interesting as that story is months old and closer looks at her charity shows corruption on a vast scale) Thanks to the likes of BLM, people in power are quick to take the knee (looks at Stamer) in which not to question blatant criminal practices. So if that Moore woman can skim off Millions regards C19 contracts , what’s to stop someone to play the victimcard to climb up the pole of graft. As I said I have no problem with the best man for the job, but what happens when the best man is somebody from your own community and is inflating prices for a worse product
Thanks Farouk. Not suggesting graft doest exist, simply that the language used didn’t say the would be ‘given’ contracts
It should always be ‘THE BEST PERSON, ORGANSIATION’ for the job not on anything else. WOKEism is killing the West and the rest of the World are laughing at us all.
Fantastic… Watcherzero talks about this like if this racist Labour policy is normal and then you all are surprised because other countries do much more with less money…
Would that be other countries who have no nuclear deterrent to pay for?🙄
Some. But not others like France.
I’ll give you a very recent example:
UK mothballs H135s bought to replace Gazelle helicopter fleet
UK procurement officials are facing awkward questions over acquisition policy after it emerged that a fleet of Airbus Helicopters H135s purchased as replacements for the British Army’s elderly Gazelles has been mothballed before ever seeing active use.
From Flightglobal By Dominic Perry6 February 2023
In what kind of country you buy helicopters for not being in use !?
For those who hit the firewall:
Acquired under a requirement known as ‘Project Matcha’, the helicopters were due to replace the Gazelles being flown in Northern Ireland.
However, the 5 (My insert) H135s have never seen operational service and are instead being placed into long-term storage, two sources with knowledge of the matter have confirmed to FlightGlobal.
This is due to the improved security situation in Northern Ireland which has removed the requirement for helicopter flights, the sources indicate.
Defence officials are now considering a range of options for the H135s, which could include a sale or lease back to Airbus Helicopters or a transfer to the National Police Air Service, which already operates H135s.
The cost of the H135s has not been disclosed, nor if they have had any mission equipment installed.
Good Friday Agreement – 1998. End of Op Banner – 2007. I am sure the security situation improved in NI a very long time ago, so why still order the helos?
Goodbye 5 AAC.
I liked 5 AAC they had a small det when I was based in Omagh and as I was from an even smaller det I used to spend time with them rather than with the resident inf regiment. This paid off in dividends when I flew the first leg home on leave by cadging a lift on Teeny Weeny Airways on a Sat Morning to RAF Aldergrove. Always remember my Sgt Maj at the time asking me how I did it.
And France has to constantly rely on the UK for heavy lift capability?
France has good areas, UK has good areas, both have weaknesses and would compliment each other extremely well ‘if’ they could cooperate on the levels needed to do so.
Hmmmm.
Fat and grumpy are things u can change. Ur colour in non negotiable.
I hope U don’t feel guilty. I certainly don’t feel guilty for being a white Scotsman. I’m proud as everyone should be.
I will add my y button isn’t working very well that’s why I put u. I can spell
Whilst I respect what you say about the Shadow Defence Minister, it’s worth pointing out that Labour represents the working class. Which would provide the majority of troops called up to fight a WW3.
It is in their interests to reverse the appalling defence cuts the military has been subjected to for the last 13 years. And I would repeat my view that the provision of defence equipment should be removed from the MoD and the armed forces should be obliged to buy only battle-proven kit bought off the shelf.
Who is this “working Class” you mention then? Are we talking about the 35 hour week public sector who are all on strike or my son who is working fifty or sixty hour weeks as a self employed builder trying to keep everything afloat or my daughter who very nearly lost her business during Covid and only survived because I worked for nothing for two years. The “working class ” are the people who get stuck in and achieve something useful.
Whoa Geoff – maybe I should have written “working people” instead. I meant no offence to either you, your hard-working son or your equally hard-working daughter!
It’s fairly obvious that on current polling Labour will form the next government. So what John Healey has to say is of interest, particularly as the rumour mill has it that Sunak/Hunt intend to inflict the military with further cuts with their mini SDSR
Fair enough, David. I jumped in a bit I know. It’s just that this class thing people bang on about drives me nuts. Some folk are born humble and work their socks off. Some are born rich and our a waste of space. There are those that make an effort and those that don’t. Many others cannot help themselves and need our help. It will always be, I think.
I find what you are saying offensive in the extreme. You might call my family comfortably off. In WW2 both my Great Uncles were veterans from WW1 and overage. Both officer Old Contemptibles in the infantry. One captured at Mons. In WW2 he rejoined and was Captured at Dunkirk. The other was in Bomb disposal round South London. One Grandfather was disabled and in the Home Guard. The other was overage at 70 but had been a volunteer Medic in the Boer War and In the Dardanelles and in France in WW1. Next generation followed similar service or KIA. Give us a break with this class rubbish.
Why that comment which he corrected gets u offended to extreme levels in outside my comprehension of offensive levels.
Not sure who you mean by the 35 hour per week public sector on strike Geoff.
I work full time for the NHS. So that’s 40 hours a week. Plus due to massive patient demands and under investment I always work 1-2 12+ hour shifts extra every week.
The public sector are on strike for many reasons. They include below inflation payrises for the last 13 years meaning my colleagues and I are around 20% worse off now then we were before the Tory scum were voted into power.
We are striking because of under investment, retention of skilled colleagues who are mass migrating to work abroad for better terms and conditions.
We are striking because it’s wrong that people have to wait 2 days on a trolley in an A+E corridor because there are no ward beds.
We are striking because the NHS since Tory’s came into power has lost 20,000 acute hospital beds due to “efficiency improvements”
We are striking because whilst the numbers of clinicians in the NHS are dropping the numbers of highly paid and frankly useless managers have increased. +5000 more senior managers in the NHS in England on £80+k per annum and +20,000 middle grade managers on £50-80k per annum.
I’m not actually striking, my team and I are derogated so continue to work 24/7 , often risking our lives for below inflation pay rises and uneducated uninformed people like you who want to believe Tory spin that the NHS and public sector workers are somehow on an easy number whilst builders like your son work harder. I bet your son is well paid and lives a comfortable life. Probably he hasn’t seen colleagues die from catching a contagious disease they caught whilst performing their “lazy” public duties.
Take a look in the mirror Geoff you are a disgrace
The problem with me being a disgrace is that my wife spent 30 years working in cardiology, my daughter in her early years in medical records. My cousin is a G.P. and his wife a nurse. So you see I am educated and informed. I didn’t mention the NHS. What I attacked and I will do it again is the idea that we should have a class system in this country in 2023. It’s at least fifty years out of date.
Your personal insults don’t impress overmuch but I would ask you to consider a fact. When a public sector employee feels aggrieved they can go on strike and hold the rest of us to ransom with ridiculous pay demands that no one can afford. The private sector has to keep going ,however hard they are hit, nor do they get the range of benefits that the of the public sector gets.
Finally the Tories are not scum anymore than you are. There are good and bad, the efficient and the inept. It’s called being human.
Bravo Geoffrey.
well played Sir, intelligent commentary Geoff.
Totally agree, as soon as Mr. Bell came up with the term “Tory Scum” he lost all credibility in his discussion. When will these people learn its not just the Tories but every shade of Government since the inception of the NHS that has had to balance the books between taxation levels and spending priorities. As for the number of ‘Managers’ in the NHS and salary levels against actual worth I totally concur, but it is the same with every Civil Service department that exists. The theory you need 4 levels of non productive management for every productive person only exists in tax payer funded organisations.
In that case they are all inept humans. I am qualified to comment on the NHS as unlike you Geoff, I’ve worked on the frontline for 30 years. Military and then NHS.
I support the strikes as the government aren’t listening to clinicians, the so called pay review body is not independent. Hence all 14 staff side representative organisations have withdrawn from engaging with the “independent” pay review body.
I don’t think pay demands are ridiculous. No clinician should be 20-30% worse off now then they were when the Tory party took office. Below inflation pay rises for +13 years have led to what are now needed as above inflation pay rises or as you call them ridiculous demands.
Although there are dangers in every job, the last 2-3 years have seen hundreds of NHS casualties/ fatalities due to the pandemic, 2 of whom were my close personal friends of many years. Unlike military service they weren’t buried with honours or shown anything other than a fleeting appreciation. The death in benefits awards to both didn’t even cover their funeral costs. So I’m not sure what gold plated benefits you are talking about?
If you reply pensions…then check your facts the NHS pension has changed substantially and is now so costly to pay into every month lots of staff have opted out.
I think it’s best if I don’t comment on your remarks.
…he said as he commented.
🤔
May I weight in here with a different slant on the 35 hr week?
I was trying to give a pay rise to one worker and a promotion to another last week. Neither are badly paid to start with this is the paraphrase of both conversations.
Worker (a) on £16:50 / hr offered a promotion. ‘No boss I’m not interested in the responsibility I cannot take more money anyway as I will have my benefits cut. Or I can work less hours per month. I’d prefer not to’
Worker (b) also £16:50/hr ‘can we train you to be a XYZ operator for an extra £2/hr ’ response ‘no boss I cannot do that because of my benefits which will be cut’
If you want to understand why things are so bad look at how the state is holding workers back.
The next idiot who says it is employers offering Mc Jobs for starvation wages will get a proper piece of my mind as I don’t think a stable job with training at £18:50/hr is a Mc Job.
The biggest problem though is the lack of interest in moving a single rung up the ladder.
The next problem is that these guys are regularly taking ‘sick’ days anyway to keep their hours under the benefits threshold.
This will affect government workers as well who are caught in the same benefits demotivation trap.
But I’m sure some idiot will pop up and say that this cannot be reformed as we can’t risk harming the poorest in society…..these guys are not poor and could perfectly well earn enough to have a nice life. Benefits are their way of life: enforced by HMG.
Couldn’t agree more. My daughter has a woman on £14.25 and has twice asked her that now things have improved some whether she would go to a 30 hour week to fit in with school 9am to 3pm but she doesn’t want to work past 16 hours a week. The whole system is completely cockeyed but no one seems to want to change it. Government after government of all parties just say “throw more money at it”.
Its actually interesting that when you look at the top tax payers(not the wealthy ie land owners, owning wealth doesn’t mean you make money btw).
The top tax payers are largely from mundane backgrounds not wealth families that were the upper class. The relevance is of course the so called upper class of today were yesterdays working class. Of course it suits some politics to portray it differently.
Agreed. Back to the redundant class system which if anything is trotted out by those who are anything but. If you pick up a hammer or cut hair or become a surgeon you are a WORKER in my book🙂
The class system still exists.
There are many people in this country whose evaluation of you as a human being will plummet to the depths of hell if you tell them you watch Corrie or Eastenders, read any form of tabloid media, drink at Wetherspoon, go on holidays to Ibiza/Majorca/Tenerife/Florida/Blackpool, have any kind of regional accent where you don’t enunciate properly, etc.
It’s not political or even about money (you’ve probably heard the saying “money can’t buy class”). This mentality exists in both the Conservatives and Labour. It’s social.
I used to think it was a myth until I came across multiple people like that.
Anyone that has to go out to earn a crust regardless of how much the earn is ‘Working’ people and they pay for the privilege in taxes etc etc and what they spend. Big earners spend lots of dosh that pay those further down the chain. So unless you have money aplenty and DONT ACTUALLY WORK that reference is no longer relevant.
As I.ve just said to expat, Angus. My wife keeps saying “if people have money in their pocket they’ll spend it on somethin” and that keeps folk employed.🙂
Some harsh presumption and unnecessary name calling Mr Bell! We all chose our jobs and it’s a little sad that people resort to “my jobs harder than yours and I’ve seen more nasty shit than you” Probably not the greatest argument on a site full of ex military blokes with numerous shit holes around the world under their belts! Is the shit I’ve seen worse than your job in the NHS, or Geoffs builder son? Or Farouks? GBs, or DMs on the trains etc you get where I’m coming from? I always think someone has lost the debate when they resort to “my jobs harder/dangerous than yours and I’ve seen more nasty death than you”! We all chose our careers, everyone deserves a fair wage for a fair day’s work, but if that career is no longer viable to you or us as a person, then crack on or move on, but let’s not keep expecting slaps on the backs and/or sympathy. Cheers.
I don’t expect sympathy but I also don’t expect Geoff to allude to NHS or public sector workers somehow being on an easy number. I note he didn’t reply to my facts around acute bed reductions, huge increases in tiers of managers or the fact the system is being deliberately run down to allow private sector to creep in and privatise by stealth the NHS. Those are the reasons for strikes.
My experience of private systems in other countries was extremely good, I had all the tests done in a single day that had previously taken 6 months to arrange here. My wife went to see a specialist who recommend an MRI, she said when do I need to come for that, ‘You don’t have to well do it today’ was the reply. Insurance for this level of service was around 1200 per year!!! Whilst there are drawback to private health insurance when it come to chronic treatments, its not as portrayed by Hollywood movies. Its actually very good value to service level for diagnosis from my experience and getting tested and diagnosed in days not months or years has huge benefits for physical and mental health. Other nations like Germany have GPs measured on through put and private sector involvement, I guess they don’t have Hollywood though 🙂
There’s many reasons for strike action and I support many of those, my youngest is a teacher and my eldest is plod! Both public sector but both a little more astute in regard to the blame game and the current politics and one will not strike, the other not allowed! The situation at the moment is not all of the Tories making, wether we like it or not, but part of a global cluster! Yes we can blame the Tories, and they are a major factor in this issue but in all honesty if Labour had been dealt the same cards over the last 2 years would we be in a different place? Not really, not much would be different! It’s all about politics and political manoeuvring and we are all mere pawns in that great game.
it’ not a just a UK thing. Same here in NZ and really bad across the ditch in Aus- large number of UK medal staff heading into AUS at present. Post COVID where did all the medical sfaff go?
👍
You are really an angry old privileged man.. try to broaden your horizons a little bit… I’m serious look around?
Ah ageist terminology! Getting angry now are you! Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
Ouch
As two persons who have had dignificant recourse to the NHS over the past year, my wife and I are qualified to add some input here, Mr Bell.
We’ve both observed a marked performance variation between the professionalism of the emergency treatment & surgical services versus: getting access to those specialities via lower tier diagnosis (including GPs – who you may or may not accept are true NHS, from your perspective, I acknowledge) & the various administration systems (plural), even within ostensibly the same Trusts. Conflicting advice, unsigned letters, missing records of phone conversations, etc.
Spans Westminster Incumbents of any hue.
In my case it was years of being told I had COPD, latched on to because I’d smoked relatively briefly decades earlier, and my wife lesser years of ‘piles’ or similar. Mine, eventually, was heart failure (unrealized) so imminent that when I entered A&E (somewhat embarrassed to cause late night trouble!) I did not at first realise they were not going to let me out into the ‘Admin’ wasteland until fully repaired and sufficiently recovered weeks later.
My wife’s was Cancer; mercifully, should be OK this year, we await. But we are old. We have a friend now in her middle age, who also years earlier reported bleeding, dismissed repeatedly as womens issues, who has very likely little time left.
We could go back further in time to treatment of a daughter when things went ‘awry’ – ‘incorrect’ records – those again, but it’s getting late, and I’m tired.
Gobsmackingly, even Keir Starmer recently berated the efficiency of the NHS tail. Like all organisations, it and employees can be very worthy (I referred on this site to the Resurrectionsts recently), but that does not mean all are Worth It, to part-coin an expression.
Now, where were we?
It’s a patchy system. I agree huge variations and postcode lottery.
I think causes are multiple but mostly lack of investment. We have a population of +65 million in UK but NHS capacity had been so reduced that it’s capable of supporting maybe 35-40 million population.
NHS hospitals under the Conservatives watch has reduced acute bed capacity in hospitals by +20,000. Now begrudging stating they will add 5000 beds back into the system they allowed to be cut.
No one should be able to make a career in public service for all working time in their lives.
Everyone should at least do 10 years in private sector.
What about that for “fairness” ?
As I have done private sector jobs. I agree. A balance of both makes a well rounded workforce.
Bring back national service. I’d be happy with that.
The youth have no wish to get their soft hands dirty so that will not happen. Look at all the jobs waiting to be filled in both private and public sectors……….rather watch tv or play games. The majority that is not all. Some still happy to serve (although we have had to soften discipline and standards to get them in even then).
Watched a guy on TV say he could make as much on government largess as he could working, so why work? Short-sighted in the extreme.
While what u say is true and some public sector employees work very hard under difficult conditions there are some roles that are the complete opposite. I also worked in the NHS for number of years in an NHS library. It was an easy job with flexible working hours, full sick pay, that wasn’t really required after the expansion of the internet. I took a good redundancy package.
When the organisation changed name and structure, the consultant in public health didn’t get the new dept director job. So the organisation paid him 2 years salary upfront and agreed to pay half salary for 10 further years and top up his pension at full rate until retirement. He was 53. Truth was he wasn’t a yes man to the CEO so they were prepared to do whatever it took to get rid. The replacement was a yes man.
The problem seems to be that people assume that every public sector job is easygoing. It has its problems, bad managers etc but that is not the problem of ever worker. As with an big organisation there are areas that could work better.
Part of the issue people have may be jealously and really wish they worked in the public sector.
Other parts are a lack of knowledge and understanding for what the public sector does and how quickly society would collapse without it.
Now does the government need a health promotion/evaluation agency spending who’s main role seemed to be writing reports that hardly anyone would read and mostly just repeated what was already known? Not really.
Is up to £250m a year spent in each nhs region eg Scotland, England, NI and wales a good use of a budget? Perhaps, the thinking being that if it saves billions by educating people it’s well spent.
Someone, somewhere thought it was a good idea at one point.
But what this doesn’t mean is that every dept is useless and shouldn’t be viewed as such.
The NHS is under great strain and the staff are working very hard. It’s people it needs not just money.
I will bang a pot anytime for them.
Well said..
👍🤣
David wrote:
Brought up in a Childrens home, can’t get more working class than that and to labour I am not British, nope to them I am a ethnic who much be treated as a victim of white racism
Farouk don’t be so sensitive about your origins – much of what you post here is jolly interesting stuff. Sir Kier Starmer has just purged his party of it’s antisemitism and they have plenty of ethnic MP’s and supporters.
And I should also have said plenty of women MP’s and supporters too. Who are not over-represented on this forum
Agree Farouk gets my vote every day. Very well written and informative posts. Thanks Farouk.
David wrote:
“”Sir Kier Starmer has just purged his party of it’s antisemitism””
6 days ago and not even a slapped hand:
That’s one ugly geezer…..oh wait…
Naughty!😂
I don’t like the Myanmar Govt but I’m not anti-Buddhist
I don’t like the Venezuelan Govt but I’m not anti-catholic
I dont like the Saudi Govt but I’m not anti-muslim.
I don’t like Russian Govt but I’m not anti-orthodox
What gets me is why is criticising the israeli govt nearly always labelled as being anti-semitism. Political ideology designed to suppress criticism !
to be fair calling The israeli government facists and antisemitism can be two different things.
Not saying thats the case here of course as I havent read the article, nor supporting any views.
However I believe one can call out the government of any country on specific issues without that being considered an insult to the people of the country.
vis a vis us calling out issues with any/all of our govenrments of the last …well ever 🙂
Sorry David he has purged the party of absolutely nothing! He has politicked, the fascist left have gone silent until it’s time to rise once more as and when Labour take the reins. Maybe he needs to also have a look at “young Labour” and the nonsense they spout! Cheers.
No worse than the free market legalise everything wierdos in the Young Conservatives I suspect!
Agreed, cheeks of the same arse mate 👍😂 But as grown ups (on occasion) it’s down to us to see what’s best for the family, community and country, and that doesn’t always come as a package in one party! That’s about policies and balancing out where we go! I cannot stand, and have found limited depth of reasoning, on chats or debates, from the sheep who follow a party just because “it’s the party”! Cheers.
Then can some one explain to me how we have the worst performing economy out of the major nations at the moment ? no one wants to answer this question on here which is funny as the Tories are gonna go for short sighted defense cuts yet again.
You’re talking about the IMF and OECD forecasts for the UK economy this coming year. Every year they publish forecasts for the coming year for the major economies.I’d recommend looking back at their forecasts for the UK over the last few years. Their record is not great especially when it comes to us. NIESR which is very close to Labour had a forecast published today it bears reading. Politics is black and white facts are shades of grey.
👍
Because Thatcher and her successor Major managed to destroy the industrial base of the country in the 80s/90s so thoroughly we have never had a balance of payments surplus since. And they flogged off all our highly profitable state owned industries on the cheap – mostly now they are owned by foreign pension funds like all our ex council houses and we pay out humungous sums to them in dividends
Simple, we have tossers in government and tossers in opposition! Defence, as we all know, is always cut to fund “popular policies” be it buying votes by the left or selling votes by the right! Governments of all persuasions talk the talk but are fucking cripples when it’s comes to the walk mate!
I am sure someone will say it is all down to Brexit. Some of it surely is, but also: very high expenditure on welfare programmes; idiotic Chancellors who crash £30bn out of the economy; vast expenditure on Covid-19 measures, some of it wasted or unnecessary; unnecessary vanity projects (HS2); wasteful expenditure (various reasons including faulty procurement in NHS, Defence); excessive interest payments on (not always necessary) public sector borrowing; plethora of quangoes and ridiculous non-jobs etc.
Agreed , one good thing is the FTSE is pretty strong at the moment.
An example being???
The only thing the Conservatives have actually conserved is the wealth & position of the richest. Everything else has gone to pot. But whatever party is in power we must be free to discuss & call out wrongdoing, hypocrisy, corruption & attempts to pull the wool over our eyes.
Moral values have been domnstrably trashed in recent times, as sadly has competence.
“Maybe he needs to also have a look at “young Labour” and the nonsense they spout! “
Ah! So someone else see’s it. I have brought that little detail up before and the silence in here was deafening. How many of them tried to get J Corbyn into power, Healy, the Amnesty International member, included.
I do not trust any of them, Weather they turn out a tad better than the current shower, I’m yet to decide.
Well, old Labour is here and firmly on the side of d’ fence man.
But this ganga sh!t ti’s pretty strong now and I might fall off.
Defence under Labour is safe; we need to own it and show we will invest in it.
Yours, Cpl B of the RMP.
Starmer’s wife is Jewish. I think it’s a fair bet he is sincerely trying to purge his party of anti- semitism.
Or making public sacrifices of a vocal few, to pander to their more reasoned supporters, knowing the others will keep a low profile until Labour are back in power!
Too subtle for me 😂
Agreed ‘Borners’. Corbyn’s Momentum communists are in control of much of the party machine and constituencies. They loath Starmer and he will be bumped if Labour win. A comment I posted about this yesterday has ‘vanished’ …
Agreed mate 👍
100% 👍🏻
That tosspost Starmer is just as guilty as ACM Wigston for promoting positive discrimination. Besides he’s never apologized for his part in the cash for conviction scandal, that he personally helped against our lads and lasses in Iraq.
👏
Racism is found everywhere, not just in the West with Whites
Keep posting my friend. You’ll do for me. Always interesting.😉
👍
David wrote:
If we take a step back, we see the exact same cuts in defence across Europe who over the past 30 years have cut their defence spending. in 1990 Germany had around 3000 Leopard 2 tanks, today they operate a 10th of that figure at just over 300.
Holland in 1993 has 330 Leopard 2 tank, today it has none, it actually leases 18 from Germany which it operates in the German army
In 1990 its miltary stood at around 104K today it stands at 41K
The US had an initial order of 750 F22s that was cut back to 187. Sold on the belief that nobody would have an operational stealth fighter until 2025.
Look at the angst we have seen these past 12 years regards the F35, too expensive and we could do better buying cheaper aircraft. We saw the liberal Canadian government of the Trudeau not only cancel the F35, they actually purchased outdated F18s Aus was retiring to take up the slack and now Moscow is strutting its stuff, old blackface (who appologised to an AL Q terrorist for getting banged up in Gitmo for killing an american soldier and handing over $10,5 million for hurt feelings) has decided to buy..the F35.
My point, its very easy to blame the Gov (hell even I do) for weak state of the British Miltary, but others did the exact same
The peace dividend has went on for to long. At the time and for some years after the world may have looked ok. Russia didn’t want to be an enemy pre putin. China was not much of a worry.
As things changed and the threats re-emerged the peace dividend should of been cancelled and reversed a bit.
If the tories do nothing to boost defence this year it’s a bad signal to send. Now will Labour actually set out any kind of plan before an election? Amounts, capabilities etc?
This reverse army cuts is such an easy one I’m
Surprised the government aren’t saying it.
The troops numbers are under the stated amount. The reduction was basically to give an actual real account.
Saying we won’t reduce the army actually costs nothing extra unless recruitment suddenly jumped up.
“Saying we won’t reduce the army actually costs nothing”
Exactly. It is pure political cobblers. If they state what is what even I may end up voting for them if they actually place actions louder than words.
It’s a Tory win win to announce it. I don’t know why they don’t make a big song and dance announcement.
We are the party of defence, reversing cut blah blah blah.
Worse is when the army size isn’t reduced and the capital budget is borrowed to throw more money at NHS and an even worse mess is created.
I’d rather see the army grow a bit but lots of new kit and upgrades are urgently needed across all three services.
Both RAF and RN need to grow their tiny fleets. The most urgent thing is proper spares inventories for everything in service.
The peace dividend was meant to be taken in the Options for Change review in summer 1990. Nothing after that date was a peace dividend – it was an unjustified cut.
I would question whether Labour really still does represent the working class. Depends what ‘working class’ and the whole concept of social class actually means in the 21st Century. Not much I suspect, particularly re. voting behaviour. The traditional middle class voter is now at least as likely to vote Labour as Tory. Traditional Labour voters feel ignored and abandoned by the party and have defected to the Tories. The old stereotypes and historical allegiancies from 50 or 60 years ago no longer hold true.
If WW3 kicks off then the entire population may well be in the firing line, not just service personnel. An incoming cruise missile does not care about class, only hitting the target and causing as much destruction as possible. As I commented in response to another article recently, easy to talk up defence when in opposition but a different story when in office and deciding where the money goes. Labour’s record on defence cuts is as bad as the Tories and Starmer is unlikely to be any different, whatever he or his shadow cabinet may claim now.
Ask Johnson, Cameron, Osborne and the other Etonians in the Tory party what they think of working people.
Regardless of what your political affiliations are, according to the polling Labour are going to win a handsome majority at the next GE. I wonder what the 6 million working poor having to live off food banks are going to do when the new Tory deputy charman Lee Anderson shuts them down – because the poor can’t budget? These people will be the cannon fodder for WW3
Curious, what is wrong with people educated at Eton in your view? Is there a conspiracy theory you’d care to share or just bigotry toward people who’s parents were able to provide a better start in life?
I wasn’t a public school boy but it’s always fascinated me how the ‘tolerant’ left (which you seem to be) are so quick to throw such things around like a slur.
“Curious, what is wrong with people educated at Eton in your view?”
Simples. They all fcuk the country up and because you were not expensively educated at a private school, I doubt if one of them would acknowledge your existence – even if you pulled your forelock while looking at the ground
Oh, so it is classism. Shame. I was hoping for something fun.
So, since you’re prejudging someone based on their perceived class, wouldn’t that make you guilty of the same offence? Judge a man omething something ‘content of character…’
Happens I’ve met plenty of public school boys & girls. A few jerks. Mostly pleasant people. Bit like all the ‘working class’ I’ve met… few jerks. Mostly good folks.
Have you ever considered maybe the type of people that climb the ladder to be politicians in the UK are just the jerks regardless of where they went to school?
I long since gave up on political affiliations. Labour will no doubt win the next GE (thanks mainly to middle class votes) and when they do it will soon become apparent that all the pre-election positivity re. defence was pure posturing. Another integrated review and another round of cuts, same as always. When WW3 kicks off we will all be cannon fodder and the two main parties will blame each other but never themselves.
There’s that ‘class’ word again 😀
Sorry David Labour does not represent the working class, they represent anyone who they can bribe or bluster! They represent political and personal stagnation, they represent the politics of envy and a hatred of anyone or any organisation who promotes personal progression or gain for family or self! Are the Tories any different, yes in view of their politics but the end result is the same for the vast majority of people! They are all self indulgent tossers with no integrity or respect! In fact Labour are traitors to the “working classes” as for the last 15 years the have been so shit, so far up their own arses that they have not provided this country with a viable opposition! Labour are part of the current problem mate, no matter how people push their party politics.
Airborne wrote:
“”Sorry David Labour does not represent the working class, “”
I will never foget how when the Vatican was voting for a new Pope in 2013 and on seeing the BBC report will the smoke be either white or black (white smokes signifies a new pope has been picked, and black means they havent) he responded with this tweet:
https://i.postimg.cc/qqtQ417X/smoke.jpg
Christ, theres never a Policeman around when you want one is there and Ive been here for hours?
I remember that! He is one bloke promoted way past his ability….very much a common occurrence in the previous and current shadow cabinet!!!!!! Lammy did visit my place if work about 18 months ago…..that in itself is an amusing story which has been redacted from memory of those commanded to redact it…..😂
Did he really post that -and was it a serious post or a tongue in cheek jest?
I’d say “Jesus Christ” but dont want to offend any religious denomination on here – can never be tooo carefull these days!
Labour does not represent the working classes, have you checked and verified the ethnic stats of this country of late? Preferential treatment for a specific ethnic group is racist in all but name.
Mate, so you would put an albatross around the military’s neck. Where will you find this battle proven kit? When the kit gets old what then? Why should we pay other Countries for their equipment when we’re perfectly capable of designing and building our own?
I know it’s absolutely frustrating when we see the Army, Navy and Air Farce pissing away billions in tax payers money. There must be a better way where we keep the UK’s money in the UK.
Labour stopped representing the working class of the UK some 50 years ago. They now represent every aggrieved minority under the sun. This statement by the Shadow Defence Spokesman is just another example of the current mobs say anything to be elected policy followed by Hindsight Starmer. Everyone and their mother knows we need to sort out our defence capabilities but Labour stating the obvious does not mean they will not cut it back in favour of vote winning offerings to the electorate.
👍
It’s many many years since Labour actually represented the working class… it assumes it has the working class vote, no matter what it does, but that hasn’t actually worked out too well for it in recent years.
You are sadly deluded if you think the Labour represent working people anymore. They certainly did but they are now made up largely of two very distinct groups, one hard left and the other is Nu Labour.
Both of which tend to over focus on minority issues to the detriment of working people of whatever creed, colour, sexuality or background.
Evidence their loss from once considered solid labour heartlands in Scotland and northern England.
It is a disaster for the U.K. because we are left with the Tories, who seem to now the cost of everything but the value of nothing.
BTW your statement about buying equipment abroad cannot be Labour policy because it would lead to job losses in those very areas that Labour need to vote for them.
David …… the Labour Party would not recognise a worker if they bit it on the arse…..
Most have never done a hard day’s work in their life…..
Ian a retired ( 46 year )working class worker
Whilst you make a fine point about ”working class” and 13 years of Tory control…
Do you need to be reminded what Labour were saying before the last election…?
Or does that not enter into it because they lost?
What about the horrendous cuts from 1994 to 2010 across all forces? Ah yeah thought you would ignore those.
What about the horrendous cuts from 1994 to 2010 across all forces? Ah yeah thought you would ignore those.
Does that include trans-black-led companies, those led by people who were born in bodies of the wrong colour?
I bet she gets along with David Lammy very well. More like Labour’s equity task force. I’m done with Labour.
Im not sure if you can read but if you actually read the article “Labour” is saying no such thing. Honestly if your going to throw slanders around here especially those based on race you should at least read what your sharing. Do you even know how labour works? It’s policy are not derived through a comment on a newspaper column like the Tory’s. It has a NEC that’s responsible for ever policy decision and manifesto.
Jim,
For somebody who tries to take me to task regards slandering the Labour Party, it appears, that the rules you dictate I subscribe to in the interest of honesty doesn’t apply to you when you opine about the Tory party.
As for my so called inability to read regards you taking offence at me disparaging labour. May I redirect you to the first sentence I wrote above:
”As much as I despise the Tories for what they have done to the Armed forces”
You were saying?
Well, I would certainly trust them more than I do this bunch of lying, self-serving charlatans.
Do you ever stop vice signalling?
Precisely. Lawrence has no background in anything other than grievance.
The truth is that the Labour Party machine is still stuffed with Corbynites who support anyone who hates the west and the U.K. is particular.
Farouk,God bless you for saying what what had to be said ,back you to the hilt
I agree. The Tories should hang their respective heads in shame for what they have done to the Armed Forces. But I wouldn’t trust Labour to follow through with their defence promises.
Let’s hope words are reflected by actions as and when the come to power.
The only action that counts is more money and a rapid purchase program that doesn’t just mean MOTS from US.
The army are so burned by their procurement mess ups that the only want US kit. Which is generally quite expensive and the parts support is eye watering.
I wouldn’t say all but it would be an excellent start. I’d create a centre of drone excellence. No more Lockheed Martin or Elbit, nevermind General Atomics. Not unless they want to build in the UK.
But what is this proposed centre achieving?
– Lightweight low power electronics? We do this anyway.
– Airframe Tec? We already do serious carbon composites in UK F1.
Sometimes the clever solution is to sit back and see which way the wind blows. The UK is offered all these products anyway?
UK manufacture of complete drones, including autonomy, comms and sensors. Not just the bits that go unused. All of it. The clever solution shouldn’t include sitting on your hands for a decade, letting billions flow out of the country. The Navy are at least trialling UK drones (QinetiQ, Leonardo, Msubs); the Army and the RAF appear to be buying from abroad.
I hope I’m wrong. After Mosquito was cancelled, the only thing we hear about in terms of replacement is buying in yet more from the US. I’ll have to have a deeper look into the Army’s Project Tiquila at some point, but I’m not aware of any future programme from either service that involves buying UK drones, other than trialling some tethered drones from Evolve.
There are plenty companies outside the USA that can built decent kit. I would give basic requirements, nice to have to wish list but not essential, budget and hand it off to industry.
For warrior replacement 200-300 CV90.
Get some urgent wheeled artillery purchase time 18 months, 18-24 units.
Use boxer to fill other roles, modular should be great. It a longer term program.
Get medium helicopter picked and get all 44.
Rest of programs like tracked artillery, tank upgrade proceed as normal.
Get the logistics needed filled out and get what they need.
Each year evaluate progress.
Money is not the problem.
The problem is the culture that makes social/professional rewards and punishment that exist in UK society.
You are punished if you are efficient.
I had not heard that the army only wants US kit. Where did that come from? CR3, Ajax, Boxer, Sky Sabre are not US products.
“”Take the NLAW anti-tank missiles that have been vital to Ukraine – it was 287 days after the invasion before the MoD got its act together and signed a new contract, with the first newly-made NLAW not due until 2024. We need to shift parts of our defence industry and MoD procurement on to an ‘urgent operational footing’, both to support Ukraine for the long-term and to rebuild UK stocks for any future conflict.”””
Naturally there wouldnt be an issue regards rebuilding NLAW stocks under Labour as they would never have supplied the Ukraine with them. It really is that simple to see.
Quite
👍
Proof?
Well for a start he’s a politician, he’s Labour and a card carrying member of Amnesty international.
Corbyn has stated as much, if he was in power, God forbid!
Well he isn’t, so what’s your point?
Er, he’s a representative of a common theme amongst his party and remaining supporters, and if you can’t see that they you are lying to yourself to justify an echo chamber point. Next!
I don’t see it coming from anyone else in the labour party so I guess I will keep lying to myself 🤷♂️
What you/we see is one thing, what happens is another. The fascist left are instructed to keep their mouths shut until Labour are in power. Years of doctrine doesn’t dissipate because a country many in the left don’t like, has been invaded by a county who’s those same many think is the originator of said doctrine! Anyway, left and right, cheeks of the same arse I’m my view!
Fascist? Oh you mean like silencing protesters? Yes, the fascist left…
Like I said previous, the facist left! Not a very good comeback in that one liner. Don’t like the term, who cares.
That was sarcasm, it’s the Tories who are putting legislation in place to remove the ability to protest.
I gathered that, I take it you had trouble understanding my reply? Sigh!!!
Well said.
Too many supposed patriots are getting their knickers in a twist over the woke and cancel cultures while ignoring the complete removal of basic protest rights by the conservative governments.
Yep, playing straight into the hands of Rupert Murdoch and his merry men at the expense of the country
He was leader of Labour at the last election so if Labour had won he’d be in power and executing his agenda, its a completely valid point that ‘if’ Labour had won things would be different.
He forgot to mention the 500 NLAWs which were delivered in 2022 and the other 500 to be delivered this year under the current contract. Facts count, such as how the Uk signed a deal with Sweden to supply additional NLAWs in April 2022
Shssssssh don’t let facts get in the way of a good story?
👍
More to the point. NATO are already doing a study on this. They may want less troops, more navy from us. Who knows
Wouldn’t we rather a military fit for the purposes *we* want? I know it’s old and tired but, where was NATO when the Falklands were invaded? What if our obligations to AUKUS and other allies?
The Falklands is not in the Euro-Atlantic area ie was out of the NATO area, so this issue did not come up.
Oh I know. I’ve read the NATO articles. Point was/is, our national interest doesn’t always align with NATO so perhaps we need to think of what we want to be capable of, not what NATO et al would like us to be.
Yep, we need assets for purely national defence reasons as well as those assigned or intended for NATO operations.
Can you expand on that please. I think it would make a hell of a lot of sense, concentrate on what we are really good at.
We are part of the most successful alliance in History, yet we seem to be stuck in a time warp of we must have a bit of everything.
Do we have land based Nuclear Missiles or Strategic Bombers ? Nope ! Why not ?
Do we actually have the Manpower to rebuild the BAOR and field a mechanised modern army that can make Putin shudder ? Probably not !
But what we can do is specialise in the bits others aren’t so good at, but really need doing.
Felix made a good point you’ve missed: we have territories and commitments outside of NATO.
If we only had what NATO wants then the overseas territories would be paying taxes but left undefended.
I think it was Stu and he posted an hour after me. But it is of course a valid point and although my answer is NATO focussed it doesn’t mean we don’t have other commitments and France is in the same boat.
But just because I didn’t mention it doesn’t mean it is undefended.
Right now our biggest threat directly to either U.K. or its dependencies is Russia.
And if you look at what I have proposed it should happily deter anyone other than China from messing with us.
In fact I’d argue we would be better able to meet an incursion abroad than we were in the Falklands.
Would we get rid of the OPVs no, nor some new GP frigates for national use.
Personally I would like to see a brand new deterrent built on West Falkland and it would have some real benefits for U.K. Flog off most of our High Security Prisons for housing and build a single replacement on West Falkland. Sorry just thinking outside the box.
A single prison for all U.K. inmates? Whilst amusing, I can see a few issues. How would they have visitors? Seems a tad unfair. So the bleeding hearts will kill that idea in the womb.
And how do we staff it? 16k prisoners currently require 24k prison staff. Population of the Falklands was 3,662 at the last census.
And how do we feed them? We’re increasing the islands population tenfold. To feed that many would require us to import everything for them (agriculture beyond sheep isn’t that great there & we can’t have the prisoners to go out on trawlers fishing…). What’s the shipping costs for 120,000 meals per day?
I’m fact 84K convicted prisoners and many currently on remand, therefore not yet convicted, with around 21k prison Officers! Sorry but just being a pedantic git 😂👍 oh and the Prison services works on the stat of 1 officer to 30 cons…..nice, not 😂
Who said all prisoners I said High Security so maybe 8,000 of the worst, most violent, murderers, rapists etc.
As for guards why would you need them ! It is in the middle of nowhere, no trees, no internet, no escape. You just need a well manned fortified guard post from which they start and finish their sentences. The rest is up to them, basic food is provided by ship, they cook and distribute it and self govern.
Hard Labour and a population no one on their right mind would ever think of invading.
Next thing you know they are playing Rugby, Cricket and surfing, oh wait we tried that idea didn’t we.
And yes it is Pie in the Sky.
Hahah! I’ll bow to your stats. Not sure where I got the 16k from but you’re quite right. So, we’d need to build a prison the size of Carlisle… we could just wall off Liverpool. Saves on shipping.
1 for 30!? And no firearms?? Nope!
Here’s an idea though; You remember a TV show called Bad Lads Army? Most of the scallies at 18-19 are only in prison because they lack discipline & got into a scrape at the pub. Well, isn’t the Army struggling to recruit? For some offences, let them choose; 12 months inside or 5 years service. Mess up in the forces, go directly to prison & do the 12 months.
Bad lads army was quite a good watch! Agreed, a lack of focus and discipline can be an issue for many youngsters, and some sort of military oriented Duke if Edinburgh scheme would be a decent compromise! As for walling off Liverpool, the razor wire would be nicked first closely followed by the bricks…sorry you scousers but had to be said 😂👍
….and as he made the announcement a squadron of pigs flew overhead.
Talk the talk ,but let’s see if ever in power walk the walk 🙄
Impression from someone who’s pointed out at least as many, likely more, Pros as Cons attributable to previous Labour Administrations: this – Who? has all the hallmarks of a Bandwagoner. Previous professional / political Defence knowledge? Well, shadow-like would appear to fit the bill exactly – unless your route in was via the Housing aspect under a Corbyn Opposition, perhaps.
Worker’s Representative? OK, I’ll have to ‘concede’ (to borrow the gentleman’s phrasing) that I know of no working class folk who have not had to struggle up via the arduous Private School & Cambridge path.
Again, as someone who’s conservative but lambasted the Conservative Party often enough (now including their novel Covid- Xmas definition), Wallace has proven probably as professional as we’ve a right to expect from a democratic Defence politician i.e. during rapidly escalatory times. Sunak to note: leave well enough alone, thanks.
So for err, remind me again, to adopt this manner is unseemly, I find.
It’s odd how often in recent decades Labour has arguably been stronger on defence than the Tories – the later will never live down the truly disastrous “Securing Britain in an Age of Uncertainty: The Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR)” in 2010. Whilst reports that the Treasury is absolutely refusing to give the MOD any extra money for the IR refresh are par for the course, it seems certain that any ‘bone’ eventually thrown the MOD’s way will be the smallest that Rishi feels able to get away, without being too outflanked by Labour on defence given that an election is due next year.
Playing devils advocate, some possible cuts to the RN to help pay for a larger Army: Mothball Queen Elizabeth; sell Albion and Bulwark (to Argentina?); disband 3 Cdo Brigade and transfer 40 and 45 Commando’s to the Army as infantry battalions; close Devonport and surrounding RN/RM bases – sell off for conversion to a Marina and holiday homes; make the Lightning Force a purely RAF manned and operated formation; cancel the T32 frigate; sell off the Wave’s (or have they already been sold to Brazil?); cancel one of the FSS’s (only two are needed with just one carrier in service). Basically SDSR Mark II!
Richard find as below Labours defence policy from their 2019 manefesto:
The primary duty of government is to guarantee the security of people in the UK. Labour’s defence policy will be strategic and evidence-led.An incoming Labour government will undertake a Strategic Defence and Security Review to assess the security challenges facing Britain, including new forms of hybrid, cyber and remote warfare. This review will also take account of the climate emergency, and associated threats of resource competition, involuntary migration and violent conflict.
The security challenges we face know no borders. Labour will increase funding for UN peacekeeping operations to £100 million. We will maintain our commitment to NATO and our close relationship with our European partners, and we will use our influence at the United Nations to support peace and security worldwide
.
Labour supports the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent. Labour will also actively lead multilateral efforts under our obligations to the Non-Proliferation Treaty to create a nuclear-free world.
Labour’s commitment to spend at least 2% of GDP on defence will guarantee that our armed forces are versatile and capable of fulfilling the full range of roles and obligations.
We will scrap the public sector pay cap, which resulted in a real-terms pay cut for our armed forces, ensure decent housing for forces members and their families, and guarantee better access for all forces children to good quality local schools.
We will consult on creating a representative body for the armed forces, akin to the Police Federation.
Labour will improve opportunities for veterans through access to lifelong learning and training, housing and mental and physical health services, and will seek greater consistency in the implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant by public authorities.
We will pay a lump sum of £50,000 to each surviving British nuclear-test veteran to support them and their families with the health conditions they have suffered as a result of exposure to radiation.
We will also ensure that black and Asian soldiers who fought in Britain’s colonial armies receive a full apology and explore ways to compensate them for the discriminatory demob payments they received compared to their white counterparts serving at the same rank in the same regiments.
The UK defence industry is world-leading and Labour will continue to work with manufacturers, unions and export partners in line with Labour’s foreign policy to support innovation in this sector to ensure it maintains its highly skilled workforce and world-class apprenticeship programme.
We are committed to procurement that supports UK defence manufacturing including our aerospace and shipbuilding, alongside a vibrant supply chain that includes the British steel industry and other component manufacturing companies providing good jobs throughout supply chains.
Labour will publish a Defence Industrial Strategy White Paper, including a National Shipbuilding Strategy, that keeps all Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary shipbuilding contracts in the UK, to secure a long-term future for the industry and its workers.
Reducing our carbon footprint can only happen with ambitious emissions reduction targets at the Ministry of Defence, one of government’s biggest energy users. So as part of our Green Industrial Revolution, we will create a Climate Change Sustainability Committee within the department to review the feasibility of increasing the use of sustainable energy in defence, and publish a strategy to accelerate the safe and sustainable recycling of our old nuclear submarines.
Basically, nothing at all about the so un PC business of weapons and kit.
A lot has happened since 2019. Let’s wait for the manifestos next time around, and if they are still talking 2%, we’ll know where we stand.
Sounds mostly sensible. It sorts out issues that have been lingering around. With what had happened since 2019 every party should be beefing up on defence. Most other European countries are doing it.
Hard to argue with much of that. I wonder why it is only RN/RFA ships that have to be built in the UK; not AFVs or combat aircraft?
Selling two amphibious assault ships to Argentina would have to be too stupid for even an MP to dream up.
Never underestimate the ability of our elected representatives to royally Balls anything up !.
Well, they have blocked attempted acquisitions by Argentina of military equipment that has British components in them.
With Labour’s track record on defence I will believe it when I see it. And I really hope I do see it.
Do they not support buying large expensive platforms then? Why does he not elaborate what this means?
What would they be? SSN? SSBN? Carriers? Frigates and Destroyers? FSS?
Being cynical, I can see a bonfire of further cuts to strategic expeditionary assets and more personnel prioritised replacing them.
The army needs an effective procurement system, effective kit, and an ORBAT that works, not necessarily more soldiers, although they are always welcome.
The army’s problems are largely the fault of the army.
“where the threats are greatest, not where the business opportunities lie.”
Like in the far east? Transation? Goodbye AUKUS? Tempest with Japan? Do they not want business opportunities for the UK?
On the army, they themselves presided over 13 years of no armoured programmes getting off the ground. Which directly contributes to the mess the army is in now when Counter Insurgency in the deserts was prioritised and conventional war fighting ignored, which began the demise of the RAC and the RA’s equipment.
A “modernised warfighting Division” would also be a decade away if they came to power tomorrow.
I am a child of Thatcher. It has taken Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak to make me realise the game is up. Sorry, time to have someone else in charge. Labour is not led by Corbyn, I could not manage that. The next manifesto will not read the same. Anyone promising to invest properly, and as quickly as reasonably possible, in the Defence industry will have my vote. Time for the Salami slicing to stop and quick. The last Labour Government said the money had all gone. This lot have simply borrowed a vast amount to cover COVID and Heating costs. How the Health, Education and Defence budgets are squared is the issue. Oh and throw in Social Care budget, I forgot that one.
“Anyone promising to invest properly, and as quickly as reasonably possible, in the Defence industry will have my vote.”
Field Lander, I agree with you. Although I’d caution a promise means “jack **** to politicians of any side, and I want to see detailed facts on what they intend to do.
I too am a child of Thatcher. I also remember what happened to defence 1997 to 2010, which is why I am so sceptical of the “White Knight” Labour party riding to defences help now, and will be until shown otherwise.
They didn’t borrow it, Sunak printed it. Do you remember the 1 trillion Zimbabwe $ note? In 13 years the Tories have doubled the size of the national debt to £2.24 TRILLION and with the BOE bank rate at 4% it’s costing us more than we spend on defence each year to service. We had to borrow £30 billion last month to finance the twin deficits and service our debts. Zimbawe style hyperinflation is a real possibility here in the UK
Don’t forget Gordon Brown paid down the national debt to 35% of GDP when he was Chancellor. The Tories have doubled it to 104%. Thats why we are financially in the shite now
They didn’t borrow it, Sunak printed it …. and Labour whole heartedly supported the whole exercise and as I recall wanted to extend the lockdowns meaning more printing, LAbour called for more support for self employed, more to those on benefits during the pandemic etc these facts mean Labour is also unfit to govern..
Thing is we won’t know what Labour are actually going to unless they do a full plan before election. We do know what the tories are doing as they have been doing it and still are now.
Basically they are both useless until proven otherwise.
And this statement might just force the government’s hand into making additional funds available for defence.
😆
Hey how did you get into my family photo album😂😂
It’s not just the Russians with hacking capabilities 😂
All good stuff, but the army has exactly the same procurement process as the other two services. DE&S Abbey Wood is a single tri-service site.
“problems with AJAX”
Some useful links can be found in this article. I never knew about the Morpheus programme.
21st December 2022
“And even if we can get Ajax to work properly, and I still reserve judgement to be honest, there’s still the issue of what comms system it’s going to use.
“The whole point about Ajax as a highly-digitised vehicle is that it’s going to carry the super-duper comms, a digitised system called Morpheus – that’s years away, they haven’t even got a proper prototype yet.
“The Morpheus programme is a dog’s breakfast.
They gave the Bowman (comms) replacement to General Dynamics who make Bowman, with a brief to make it open system so they wouldn’t be locked into buying expensive kit from General Dynamics anymore. Then they wonder why it’s not coming through.
Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.
Creating an open system standard is tough, I grant you, but surely you work with multiple suppliers, not just the people whose system you’ll be replacing. Then you need an interface to the old comms systems, so you don’t have to big bang the intro. Tough, yes, but that tough?
Thank you for the update Jon. I suppose “turning a corner” is a start 😂 and with 26 delivered as of October 22, we’re making progress!
14th January 2023
“Appearing before the Commons Defence Committee, defence procurement minister Alex Chalk has said that the British Army’s Ajax armoured fighting vehicle programme has now ‘turned a corner’
Probing senior military leaders responsible for the programme, Conservative MP Mark Francois asked: “Sorry, so 10 years and four billion pounds on, you still can’t tell us when it is going to enter service? Just give us a date, can any of you give us a date?”
We don’t know how the RGT is going to go, and whether there is rectification to do. That’s probably why an ISD can’t be given.
But we are buying expensive kit from GD – its called Ajax.
We are still buying Bowman too. The difference is we are supposed to be moving towards Ajax. We are supposed to be moving away from Bowman.
We are still buying Bowman too. The difference is we are supposed to be moving towards Ajax. We are supposed to be moving away from Bowman.
AJAX is being built and delivered with a fully operating Bowman system, not “going to use”, is using. It has a fully operating Battlefield Management System able to hand off data, which is exactly what it is designed to do. Just to point out too; Bowman is a digitised system.
Thank you for the update Ian M, when will Morpheus be installed and is there any idea yet of an in-service date for Ajax?
“Morpheus is the name of the programme that will deliver the next-generation tactical communications system to the British Armed Forces. In 2016, the MoD publicised plans to replace the existing Bowman with a system named Morpheus.”
Hi Nigel, an IOS date as that ignorant grandstanding buffoon Francois was banging on about is entirely in the gift of the MOD. ATDU are in the throes of RGT as I type, platforms have been delivered and training continues, what else can I add? Morpheus is in development and outside of my info sources.
Cheers
Time will tell no doubt!
I wonder who accepted the position of RGT Manager and if they are still employed.
Many thanks for your quick response.
The RGT has only just started. I doubt anyone would have sacked the RGT manager unless he has failed to set it up properly.
Someone has to take responsibility I guess.
4 February 2023
“General in charge of MoD’s disastrous £5.5bn Ajax contract steps down
The armoured vehicle project has been hampered by severe delays and safety issues”
LINK
Maj Gen Carew Wilks is of course a retired officer who worked for GDUK until a few days ago and formerly worked at DE&S.
I think you might be assuming he has been sacked by GDUK – that may not be the case. He is of retirement age.
It appears he is still in post at this time.
Jamie Weller General Dynamics UK Limited
Greater Newport Area · Programme Manager – Reliability Growth Trials (RGT) · General Dynamics UK Limited
“Highly effective in managing complex defence programmes, with a current role consisting of managing product safety within the Armoured Fighting Vehicle AJAX …”
Bring back clansman 🙈.
I don’t know much about the comms systems but are the military looking for stuff that already exists in the civilian world?
Like iPhone and others can receive and transmit data, run programs, add/remove apps, location data of multiple devices etc etc.
What is the problem with bowman that can’t be fixed with upgrades?
What is this new system and what are the main issues?
Outside of my remit too MS, I’m afraid.
It is from 20 years ago, heavy.
Political mud-slinging is sadly very boring. On whichever side of the fence you happen to be. Sure it is easy to criticise Labour, but then it is just as easy to criticise the Tories who wasted uncounted billions on thier own enrichment. Billions that could have been used for defence. Or NHS. Or whatever. Which is better? Which is worse? Sure, dig up some stupid Labour policy but there are equally ridiculous Tory policies. Are we talking about politics or defence here?
Sure, both parties have horrid track records, and a bunch of blatent lies that can be dug over ad nauseum, but what either party decides to do in future is unknown. I personally think it will be a decade of cuts (or at best static budget) for defence whoever wins the poison chalice at the next election.
Let’s stick with the facts, rather than conjecture. The headline is “Labour calls for UK rearmament and end to military cuts”. Sure, it is political posturing, but I’d rather someone say that and be held to account if (when!) their position changes. The guy says something positive in military terms and it gets shot down in pieces as if he’s taking the axe to the entire defence of the realm. What exactly do you want him to say – “We’re knocking 20% off the defence budget”?. “We’re doubling the defence budget”? Some people would criticise either way! What would people be happy with? Sure there are a million other things he could have said that would be better for defence. Or worse.
I trust Wallace (up to a point) and that is about it. The worst thing for defence will be if he gets fed up with Sunak and the constant sttream of cuts that are just over the horizon.
In the meantime, sure we can argue about politics and insult each other, but isn’t the place for that a different forum? No matter who I slag off, or call wankers or whatever, I’m very unlikely to change their minds. And their very unlikely to change mine. It just gets boring reading a bunch of posts from one side, and then the other. A pissing contest that is completely dull and that no-one is going to win.
Mick
“they’re”
Well said sir. Both parties are a shower of the proverbial. If only there was another option.
But as you rightly say, not the forum.
Thanks. There is a lot of sense talked on here a lot of the time. But sometimes it is like being trapped in the pub with two sets of football supporters from different teams arguing who is best, and why. And your own team aren’t playing. Strange really, because this is a site where the people who are here (who aren’t simply baiting the other “side”) are mostly just interested in defence – a lot in common I imagine.
God knows why it descends into chaos. Isn’t democracy supposed to be about deciding who you want to vote for, or even not voting at all? And that being your own decision? If you look at the UK (or indeed any country), sure it might make some small differences who is in power, but in general the world goes on pretty much the same, regardless. But if somehow you decide to vote for (A) or (B) then suddenly it has become a world where you’re the enemy and an apologist for Putin or Hitler or Stalin or Thatcher or Corbyn, or whomever. We’re all adults. We don’t all think the same…thankfully.
And as Mark Twain said “If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.”.
SNP, I’ll get my coat
Well put Mick, far too many posts on this forum decend to mud slinging and regurgitation of entrenched political viewpoints and personal bias. If any of us want any more of that there are many other social media platforms that have decended into gutters of angry echo chamber nonsense.
Quite sad from a site that generally provides some decent content relating to defence. Reading the posts you would literally not have a clue what the original point of the article actually was.
So I get slagged off by some because I do not trust any politician. Not that I care. Here though you have a prime example of a vote catching snake oil salesman at work. One thing is right though, we should concentrate on the Atlantic, Arctic and northern Europe. “Global Britain” is a greased piglet dream. Too much Eton/empire and not enough pragmatism or realism. Twas greased piglet that gave our reserves of weaponry away, that ran down our ammunition stocks. Whilst betraying the old duffers who voted to exit EU left. Someone in this thread mentioned young Brits being conscripted. Have you seen the state of most of them? We gentlemen, are not a world player. Have not been since Suez. Time to reign in the silly ambitions, concentrate our efforts in Nato and securing northern Europe. The Chinese are coming. The old “domino effect” is back in play.
“Atlantic, Arctic & Northern Europe” and “the Chinese”. Feels contradictory but perhaps I’m misunderstanding.
The northern shipping lanes will open with supposed sea ice melt. Compare historically to the Northern Passage in Canada. Trade not having to ship via Suez or the Cape. China has already bought up most of SA, and is doing the same to Argentina. That’s why we stay in the Falklands and St Helena, also Ascension. China needs expansion for raw materials. Siberia and the high Arctic are ideal. See, the squeeze is not only overland via a new Silk Road, it is incremental hence the comparison to the domino effect. Violent revolution and spreading communism by proxy war are largely replaced by market/commercial acquisitions. So in effect, China wants to see a reduced Russia, one that cannot challenge its ambitions. A Han Empire not only needs Pacific expansion beyond the first island chain, but it also needs expansion everywhere. They will do it this century, as the “west” becomes weaker, not only militarily, but politically, they will eat away at not only individual countries, but trade/military blocs too. Only India can challenge that in the Indian Ocean, the US/Japan in the Pacific. IMO the Europeans need to challenge it where I stated.
I don’t agree that we are not a world player. Why do you say that? We are P5, G7, have a blue water navy, nuclear weapons, internationally admired diplomacy, world class Intelligence services etc etc.
If you restrict our ‘canvas’ as you suggest to the NATO area, that would mean cutting the RN in half. Not a good idea to me.
Think I’m with you on this one Graham. Kind of bored with the whole “U.K. is rubbish” and “we’re just dreaming of the old Empire” nonsense.
We’re not perfect (obviously) but… we just lack ambition.
We have an aging population, a shrinking economy, massive debt, and no industry. We depend on unstable sources for most of our food, energy, and raw materials. Quality of life for our citizens, happiness and security, “education”? All frankly a joke. We also have one of the most archaic and corrupt political systems in the world. Just look at the greased piglets’ performance as a prime example of institutional corruption. I could go on, the NHS, The Blob and a host of other parasitic entities like the “Windsor/Wales” institution. As for the forces? I was part of it for a long time in a number of roles. If you think militarily we are a “world player”? The word delusional springs to mind.
John, I agree that we have all of the problems you describe, except that it is not true that we have ‘no industry’ (we are the 8th largest manufacturing nation in the world)
…https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/uk-now-worlds-eighth-largest-industrial-nation/
and I agree that our armed forces are smaller than they should be – I frequently state and bemoan that the army has been cut once or twice a decade since the end of the Korean War. I too served – in the army for 34 years – and saw the strength decline and saw that much of the armoured equipment was neither upgraded or replaced.
I thought I had explained in brief why we are considered, by many people in the world, to be a “world player” but did not ever say that we had the biggest or the most modern of armed forces – so I think that charge of being delusional is unfair.
Clearly you think that a nation can only be a world player if it has very large armed forces – step forward North Korea, South Korea, Vietnam, Brazil, Taiwan, Pakistan, Egypt and Cuba!
I really don’t think we lose our world player status because you don’t like the Royal Family, Prince Harry’s wingeing, or that the NHS needs improvement. We are a developed country with problems – even the US has sizeable problems.
Who do you think can be called “world players”?
We all have strong opinions, especially many vets. I worked in mental health for a long time, still do some voluntary. I now measure a country’s “strengths” by the well-being of its population. This country cannot claim imo, to be a world player in any shape or form due to the neglect of its citizen’s well-being. That again is my judgment, others are entitled to disagree. We have outdated institutions not fit for purpose, they are corrupt ( we have slipped in the world corruption table ) We saddled ourselves to the US and do their bidding. Our soldiers are asked to perform miracles. We then have some vets pursued into their old age whilst terrorist scum walk free, courtesy of politicians with US pressure and involvement in our domestic affairs. I could go on, but will add the Covid fiasco turned me, and many vets I know, totally at odds with the government. Civil liberties erosion by corrupt politicians is not the reason I or others served. We are being ruled by despots, end of. Bit of a rant but feck it. Best wishes.
Hi John, I now see exactly where you are coming from. Probably I should say that the UK is a country that operates on the world stage because it wants to and always has done so, although her armed forces are hollowed out in places, and many of her institutions are in need of reform.
I will not ever vote for the Conservatives again as they don’t solve the myriad of problems you refer to and lack ethics. Ordinary people are really finding it hard to afford to live or to have a high quality of life in this ‘developed country’. It is shameful.
Labour are the party of defence cuts more then the others. However all the parties are guilty of the cuts. I hope our useless politicians get it in their heads that we need to fund our armed forces properly. And we have got to stop pouring money into flawed programs like Ajax.
This guy likely to be our next defence minister, hopefully we won’t play party politics whilst Russia and China on manoveres
I was wondering, what percentage of shadow ministers become ministers with the same portfolio? Liam Fox got the same brief, but if Healey is good, might he be given a “better” job?
Healey suffering from memory loss? Largest most expensive platforms ever ordered by Labour in 2008 and still not much use unless we stump up yet more billions for the numbers of F 35s their ambitious and wholly unfunded plan envisaged.
Wars either illegal or unwise out of NATO area requiring UOR purchases that left no money to keep our NATO relevant land equipment up to date.
The 2010 defence cuts were disastrous but were necessary in the context of the financial crisis, another achievement of Gordon Brown, with his removal of banking supervision from BOE and his years of profligate spending on benefits.
Healey’s comments on NLAW production are nonsense.
The recent “tilt to the Pacific” is trivial compared to Blair’s commitment to the new world order. This uncritical acceptance of a US neo- con world view led directly to the commitment to expeditionary wars and the aircraft carriers.
This is all to try to alter the perception that Labour is vulnerable on defence, especially after the Corbyn years.
The army is in a poor state. But a lot is being done or planned with funding in place to tackle this. Germany has announced a massive sum to upgrade its forces but is finding it hard to spend quickly. If there were a big uplift in budget, what could it be spent on that could be delivered in the next year or so? As Russia has found, the more complex a weapon system, the harder it is to accelerate production. All the UK needs to do now beyond what has been planned is replenish weapon and ammunition stocks.
The carrier programme and the F-35B programme are not running on the same timetable, so one would be delivered before the other. Get used to it. The F-35s are coming. What is unfunded?
UOR purcases are funded by the Treasury and do not impinge on the entirely seperate MoD budget, which is for core equipment.
Our army and very often much of our navy has always been committed to expeditionary operations – this is not a new thing.
Think our government need to learn from our friends in Poland how to equipped an Army 🤔
Reality. Here’s a pie chart of the UK budget for 2023.With interest payments already greater than Defense the money has to come from somewhere unless the UK borrows more. Which portion of the budget can be cut that is politically acceptable?
Cut the welfare bill. It’s a sad fact that +50% of the UK populace get more out of the state via benefits and handouts then they pay into the system. That’s where the axe should fall.
Stop the pensions triple lock escalator and benefits rises as per CPI. It’s all nonsense and living well beyond our means.
You do realize that this not a simple cash comparison? What people receive includes healthcare and education. A big part of the rise in so called net dependency is the gradual increase in retired households. Not only do they receive state pensions but they are more likely to receive expensive healthcare.
The real problem is the general inefficiency of much of the public sector. Top heavy bureaucracies in the NHS, armed forces, local government and a multitude of state funded quangos sucks away resources from real services and longer term investment.
Cameron articulated this ( bonfire of the quangos)but then did very little to put it right.
To cut the welfare bill it would have to be very targeted. Most people on working related welfare are already struggling to live so people in that situation can’t afford a cut. Pensions is a difficult one and really would need to be done on who can afford it.
I still view that people with more money that are using creative ways to move money can afford to pay more.Tax avoidance, businesses could be a source of income.
The poorer 90% of society pay what they are meant to pay.
When looking at where the money is made in the country there is a place to gain income from certain sectors.
Everyone should be paying a fair share on income generated. How a company can make multiple millions in the uk but pay very little in tax all the while using service.
Re tax avoidance; could not agree more. This would be so simple to do for retail type companies; Google, Starbucks, Amazon etc. but have to tread carefully for companies employing people making products for export. Want to encourage external investment.
Re work related welfare; go listen to some Thomas Sowell on YouTube (Stamford economist). Often government subsidies to help the working poor just drive prices of the subsidised sector up. Take childcare; if Anna can afford £100 per week for childcare, that’s all I can charge as that’s what they’ll pay. But if that’s a hardship, gov steps in & taxpayers subsidise £50 to poor old Anna. Pretty soon I’ll get to charge Anna £150 because that’s what I can charge and she can afford. Rinse & repeat. You ever seen a Nursery owner in an 8 year old Citroen? Nope. New Mercedes bud.
It seems odd but when we start fiddling with market forces they don’t understand because of ‘feelings’ that we want to help poor old Anna, we often just end up wasting taxpayer money.
you do know when that was calculated, that one of the benefits was health care (I.e the NHS) and educations (I.s Schools)
Our State Pension is far lower than that of many European countries, so I think it should be protected from inflation – its not as if it will get a real increase.
I agree about cutting benefits where possible to encourage working for a living. I’d be happy to pay prescription charges – I am 67 and can afford them.
Cancel HS2 – too expensive, too late, impact on environment and doesn’t recognise many WFH/Zoom call these days and don’t need to travel for meetings. Japan launched High Speed rail in 1964; we should have adopted the concept at a similar time, not paying a fortune to do it in the 2020s.
4% on “protection”: that’s a massive amount of money to spend on condoms for Boris! I guess at least that means fewer love children, hopefully!
To be honest I’d say it’s not cuts that are made but increased revenue from taxation. The increase in corporation tax to 25% can’t come soon enough and should have been enacted years ago.
I’d say the government (whichever government is in power) needs to explore new avenues of taxation as well.
I read a study a couple of years ago that said legalising cannabis could generate at least £5 billion a year for the economy, plus police savings. Might be other avenues of taxation that haven’t been explored that could generate income, rather than just the simple raising or lowering of taxes.
There’s an argument that cutting corporate tax rates actually increases tax revenues (within reason).
Plus, a lot of the big (especially the multi-national) companies pay no tax anyway thanks to clever accounting around IP. Look at Starbucks, Google, etc. So you’d really only be taxing the smaller, British owned Cos.
Has cutting corporation tax ever actually brought in increased tax revenues, though? It dropped to 17% at one point not long ago but there weren’t any revenue increases.
There needs to be more effort in taxing those large corporations, then, and closing a number of tax loopholes that they use.
And as I said, find new avenues of taxation rather than just raising or lowering.
Yeah, it dropped to 17% in 2020…. can you think of anything else happening that year to cripple the economy? 🤔. Rather disingenuous argument.
To answer your question; yes. Within reason. But the rate is not the be all end all & there are multiple other factors. Interest rates, job market, global economy, energy costs, red tape, business rates, VAT etc etc.
As for taxing large corporations effectively; could not agree more. We can’t make it too hard/expensive for companies to trade here as a lot of them will just leave & corps being in the U.K. employ people that pay income tax. This has been an issue for decades (ie both parties happy to ignore) and what’s really frustrating is that they’re quite happy to introduce legislation to target sole-traders & people claiming to be self-employed (ie trying to play the same games) as they’re easy targets, but they let the big fish away. Then they have the audacity to claim it as a big win.
“New avenues” – if you’re wanting a discussion about legalising cannabis, ok. I certainly see the benefits & I’d be surprised if it would only yield £5B. If you’re thinking ‘what else can we tax’, not so sure more tax is a good idea.
Yeah, it dropped to 17% in 2020…. can you think of anything else happening that year to cripple the economy? 🤔. Rather disingenuous argument.
I never said about crippling the economy, but lowering the corporation tax rate didn’t bring in anything extra, either. I’d be willing to bet that it didn’t bring in anything extra any other time it’s been lowered, either.
New avenues” – if you’re wanting a discussion about legalising cannabis, ok. I certainly see the benefits & I’d be surprised if it would only yield £5B. If you’re thinking ‘what else can we tax’, not so sure more tax is a good idea.
Not necessarily trying to get a discussion, though I also see the benefits (I say this as someone who has never even smoked a cigarette and despises smoking).
You say more tax isn’t a good idea, but it’s either increase tax, introduce more taxes for things e.g. through legalising certain things, or cutting spending. Otherwise debt will just continue to spiral.
I’d take that bet. As I said, just the rate is far from the only factor at play. And given the chaos of the pandemic response, the cut to 17% is overwhelmed y other factors such that any attempt to claim it did or did not have x effect is just silly. It can and has had that effect in the past but it’s never the only factor.
If you’d like to learn more about it, here, do your own reading; https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/21345/economics/does-cutting-corporate-tax-rates-increase-revenue/
The U.K. already has some of the highest taxes in the world BUT as I think we’ve both agreed to, they need to close some loopholes and collect taxes in a fairer manner. This will not fix everything.
If you want my honest thoughts as to how to get out of our mess; OECD numbers show the U.K. in the top 10 nations spend per capita on education and health among developed nations. And yet we hear a constant stream of complaints about how underfunded everything is & our results aren’t good enough. So I have to ask, do we think the money is getting where it needs to go? Army procurement has had one or two faults to say the least. So, how about before taxing more and more, the state learns how to spend our money better.
My starting point would be to acknowledge that 1 in 5 working Brits (21.5%) get their pay check from the State, and that maybe that’s a tad high. If it is, it appears possible that we could have the same results for less money, or better results from the same spend, if we simply get more efficient & effective at spending what we have.
IMO, the way out of our mess is to stop printing money, minimise future borrowing, reduce/remove as many barriers to entry for anyone trying to create wealth (in which corp tax plays a small part) to drive economic growth. Economic growth definitely yields more tax revenue so we can pay down our debts. While we’re at it, let’s create a leaner state apparatchik.
I don’t disagree with what the man is saying. But talking good defence priorities when in opposition is one thing. Doing is another.
and therein lies the truth of the thing.
Polictival parties do what is required to get elected. Defense just hasn’t been a priority for the general public in decades and so neither party has really focused on it beyond cost cutting.
Ukraine has changed that and the general public are now more aware of the risks. Whether that interest will remain another 2 years until the election who knows.
Either way whatever party you support, you can’t argue that the current government, at this moment in time, is in some form of paralsym, they don’t seem to be tackling any major problems, they just seem to be busy fighting between sub factions. When truss seriously thinks she has a chance of come back, after the damage she did last time, you know there is a problem.
Saying that the government will need to look for cheap vote winning policies over the next 12 months or so to stand a chance of reelection and defence might be a winner, as it’s probably the easiest issue to tackle and win votes, when compared to the negative growth, out of control inflation, NHS melt down, etc.
Hi everyone, to be honest I don’t trust any of the parties when it comes to defence which is pretty depressing to say really, our people have become woke ++ I think we are the worst on this lovely planet by a stretch and my country Scotland is the worst of the four nations I’m very sad to say, people in Britain don’t think there is any threat from anywhere and the rest of the planet think the same way as themselves which is kinda terrifying to be honest, putting us up to 3 percent or more would maybe stop us having to put the NHS up to 30 percent later on when we’re getting our arses pummeled by whoever, and I know we are part of NATO but do we really want to be behind France and Germany with our military🤦 think il move to the isle’s and live off grid 👍
We’re not the worst bud. The “Woke++” are just the loudest and they’ve done well to censor free speech or have everyone so terrified of being arrested for saying something wrong they self-censor.
If you need a roommate on the isles though, give me a shout. I’ve got some wilderness skills and rebuilt my own Landy 😜
Politicking….none of them care, they just care about getting into power! Once (yes once) Labour are in power you will see all the usual left wing dross crawling out of the woodwork, start yet another moderate/hard left civil war, with the result being dormant and self destructive politics, throughout Westminster! We no longer vote for who is best (those of us who aren’t political sheep following their party blindly) we vote for who is the least worse! Hand or foot, which do you not want to be chopped off……mmmmm let me see FFS!
Like during a divorce; the children have to decide which abusive parent to live with. This was heard on a flight in the US just before the 2016 election.
Agreed 👍
Yup.
With Putin rehabilitating the country’s bunkers, something tragic maybe about to happen to Europe. Rearmament needs to be accelerated. NATO needs on the other hand to undertake continuous military exercises including deployment of more and visible bombers on the Russian borders as a warning to Putin and his generals. Why is he preparing bunkers if there are no threats to his cities. He is going to cross the redline which might require him to be in the bunker or worse.
Scaremongering to my mind.
Both Russia and the west maintain contingency facilities, and have done for years. Russia was building Yamantau and Kosvinsky Mountain facilities back in Yeltsin’s day, and has had Metro 2 and the Command Posts SE of Moscow for decades. The US has never relinquished the NMCC, Raven Rock, Mt Weather, and Cheyenne Mountain. The UK got rid of most of our locations, but not all.
It would be surprising if both sides were not dusting them off given world events. A few months ago the Russians dispersed their aviation assets that act as Airborne Command Posts in an exercise. None of that means it is all about to kick off.
The 2010 defence review was a massive mistake. As far back as 2008 it was known that Putin was developing hypersonic missiles and other new military tech,. Other activities such as buying up gold reserves should have clued up the western governments that Russia was gearing up for war again.
We went to sleep mate Putin had bad intentions for year’s ,we had a Tony Blair government who would not do anything to upset Putin or the EU far to soft.Then we had a MR Cameron and George Osborne who would do anything to save money 💰.Remember saying year’s ago to the boy’s Putin will be trouble .How right I was ,but do wish I wrong.🙄
The 2010 review was a response to the global financial crisis. Defence was an easy target. I don’t think any other area of Govt expenditure got such a pasting. Apparently Cameron wanted the cuts to be even deeper.
Finally a sensible policy from Labour.
Potentially yes Jason. I’d like to see much supporting detail on their defence policy however. The devil is in the detail.
I’ve read a lot of the Posts and there is an awful lot of Political Mud slinging going on.
Labour is the party of the working class ? Maybe once it was, but not now it has become a party of ideological elitists balanced out by a reasonably sensible Social Democrat moderate majority.🤞🏻
No left wing member of the privileged, ideological elitist left has ever won a general election in this country. Every time Labour has gone left it has lost, and lost badly (Benn, Foot, Miliband and Corbyn).
The simple reason for that is that the non public sector Worker in this country isn’t Socialist and doesn’t identify with a bunch of upper middle class twits with a conscious. The North flattened Corbyn for that very reason.
Labour has a new Policy to encourage wider opportunities for Black starter industries. Fine idea just remove the word Black, it’s better than the Old Boy Networks.
Only in the U.K. would we have a Socialist Party that quite honestly should shut up and hold its head in shame when it comes to equality.
No female elected leaders, Prime Ministers, far fewer Black, Asian or Gay politicians in key posts.
Unfortunately for the Conservatives, they have managed to completely screw everything up so badly and wasted so much money no one trusts them.
A Labour politician who is Shadow Defence Secretary and supports Amnesty International. So what ?
A Conservative Prime Minister commissioned the report upon which the Welfare state was founded, He also advocated for a Council of Europe and the Convention on Human rights. His name was Winston S Churchill.
A Labour PM followed him and got so fed up with the US banning us from accessing our own wartime A Bomb research he ordered the development of our own Bomb with a Union Jack on it.
If John Healy is serious about this and can get a proper debate on how we fund defense, spend wisely and help to overcome the obstacles than quite frankly I don’t care what Bloody Party he is in nor that he supports prisoners of conscience.
I just read the first few comments and the bun fight against Labour.
There are people who vote Labour who are pro defence. Get off your horses.
Yes, but they’ll soon be kicked out of the party once they’ve been identified 😆
I’m still here!
…
Comrade
…
😉
🤫
But are there people in Labour who are pro defence who will actually be in charge? Who are they? I’ll look them up.
Now maybe you’ve got a point… There aren’t many people in charge of Labour who are even pro working-class.
I forget who made the comment about the British Army in WWI being “lions led by donkeys”.
Oh-hum. Plus ca change.
Time will tell.
John Healey, Shadow SofS. Good guy. He has no background in Defence but has grafted hard to learn his brief. He cuts about and meets the troops too.
And if he’s removed to another ministerial post once they gain power, who else is there in Labour who might be capable or even aware what “Defence” entails?
As a bloke who tried to get Corbyn in, with all his defence views, and is an Amnesty International member too, which I fear isn’t ideal for a defence minister who might authorise people to be killed, I’ll wait to be convinced.
Fair point. I am not sure there are many MPs who are fully supportive of Defence, as there are no votes in it.
At long last a Labour MP making sense likewise Admiral West. Please tell me if it is ever envisaged that the RN will get fixed wing aircraft for its carriers. I dare not mention NZ’S puny efforts, however the RN is one good “product” produced by the UK another is NEW ZEALANDERS! Keep up the good work with the computer articles, I enjoy them very much. Best regards BRUCE
The RN already has fixed-wing aircraft for its carriers, the F35B. 🤷🏻♂️
Ahem.
Carrier…
One is a awol which raises the point if we need 4 bombers, do we not need 4 carriers?
Serious question because if we do, should we not have gone America class and covered the LPD/LPH roles as well and just produced 8?
I like your posts, so am awaiting your considered reply Sean.
We have two carriers one on ops, one under repairs/maintenance. Yes the PoW repairs weren’t planned, but if you look back at the history of previous highly successful naval vessels they have had far more troublesome teething issues and uncertain starts.
With regards to surface ships it was always the ‘rule of three’ that applied to availability, with: one available for ops, one in deep maintenance, one in training or provisioning ready for deployment.
The reason we have 4 SSBNs for CASD is that they are hugely more complex machines. Nuclear submarines are said to be as complex as a space-shuttle, I’d personally say they’re more complex. As complexity increases so does the potentially for technical issues mechanical/ electrical/ computational, and the level of training and expertise required to crew and maintain them.
(Not to mention the consequences of a SSBN not being available are far greater than for the non-availability of any surface ship. This alone would justify an extra, 4th, vessel.)
Personally, I wouldn’t say no to another carrier. But then we’d need extra aircraft, escorts, and crew for it too. And taxes to pay for it all…
As for the America class, they seem to have turned out to be a bit of a kludge. The first batch had a capable airwing of up to 25 F35Bs, but it was felt the well-deck was too small.
Later batches will have a larger well-deck but much smaller aviation facilities. They can get away with smaller airwings on these later America class ships because they will always operate with a Nimitz/Ford class carrier and it’s huge airwing.
If the RN had gone for an America class style vessel it would either end up with too small a well-deck or too small an airwing. And unlike the USN, it wouldn’t have had a dedicated carrier to provide air cover.
Your penultimate paragraph hits the nail on the head, though.
We seem linked to this rule of twelve from the Falklands; I don’t agree with it but persons much higher than I was deem it enough.
Therefore, if we should continue with 12, should we not be planning for smaller carriers but with more capability? Aka. Amphib landings?
I wouldn’t get hung up on 12, it was simply the number of Harriers they could fit onto the Invincible class alongside the helicopters required. Plus we didn’t deploy one carrier with 12 aircraft to the Falklands, we deployed two with 26 Harriers (16 FAA and 10 RAF).
For the QE class I believe 24 is still envisaged to be the standard number of embarked F35s, ie approx the same as the first tranche of the America class. And remember the America class will always operate with a Nimitz/Ford carrier and never alone.
Steel and air are cheap. Building a carrier 50% longer doesn’t make it 50% more expensive. It’s the stuff that goes aboard the vessel that costs.
Combining air-operations with amphibious operations in a single vessel increases complexity and cost. Costs are going to further increase because you’re going to need more vessels to provide the same number of aircraft.
Individually 2 ships carrying 12 aircraft will cost less than one that can carry 24, but you’ve doubled the number of onboard system you need to buy to equip them. Operating costs will also be higher as you need more crew, etc.
That’s correct, 24 F35Bs will be the standard peacetime air wing. Backed up with Merlins for AEW, ASW etc. If thing went hot, expect additional F35s to be flown to the carrier. The previous 1SL Radakin, had said that a strike wing could be anywhere between 36 and 48 jets, as that would still be a comfortable fit. Though he did say it could handle quite a few more if needed.
What is the rule of 12?
No idea, I guess a Squadron since the Falklands seems the rule of thumb for the RN.
Many on here, would wish more a/c but, somewhere in Treasury/MoD circles, 12 seems ample.
4 carriers would be lovely but we could never afford it or the associated air wings required. Nor could we find the crews for all of them.
We have 4 bomber subs because one is always at sea 24/7/365, with a second one working up to deployment that could still be deployed at fairly short notice if we needed to.
We don’t need to have one carrier at sea constantly like we do with the Vanguards. As long as one is always available to deploy on fairly short notice, we’re good, but it doesn’t need to actually be away at sea like the Vanguards do.
I believe the UK went with the correct design and decision for the two carriers. They are of a size that can take larger aircraft and can be relatively easily modified for CATOBAR operations. However, if we had gone down the CATOBAR route with EMALS and the AAG systems. Like the USS Ford, both ships would be still in the initial operating capability (IOC) stage. The QE certainty would not have done the World tour last year.
The USS Ford still cannot launch and recover F35Cs using its EMALS and ASG systems. Which means if we had gone down that same route, we’d have a carrier with no fixed wing aircraft! Unless we temporally leased F18s or Rafale M. At least with the F35B, the carrier could be used from day 1. Plus it’s a lot easier to get pilots qualified for carrier STOVL operations.
Both Albion and Bulwark have proved their worth. Neither of the two carriers is suited or designed to be amphibious assault ships. So a dedicated pair of ships will be required to replace the two LPDs. Looking at the benefits that a through deck design, like the Wasp class LHDs, has for simultaneous helicopter operations along with a well deck. I can see a similar type of ship being ordered to replace the Albion class. If we had the money a licensed build of the Italian Trieste would be ideal.
A bomber (ie a SSBN) is not protected by a Carrier Strike Group – that would rather advertise the bomber. It is more usual to allocate a SSN to this task.
All politicians whether a parish councillor or Member of Parlimant are bunch of egotistical liars who will saying anything to get 2 mins on air or a couple of inches in print/online. Long live MR Fawkes
I never sought payment, I just sought resolution of the hundreds of f.ing potholes on a road in Ulverston, I resigned due to circumstances, my successor took up the mantle and under Labour got it sort.i.d
Yours.
? who mentioned payment,
Publicity = advertising = reward = payment.
A ‘NATO first’ strategy being the policy that left us woefully unprepared for the Falklands War. The resultant deficiencies were paid for in lives. Capabilities need to be agile enough to meet a variety of conflict scenarios with little warning, rather than built around one particular NATO use-case.
Really? What examples are there that ‘NATO first’ left us unprepared for the Falklands conflict?
I suspect for the foreseeable future Putin or even Russia’s next President will be more mischief making around the world and will be more prepared to provide advanced weaponry and support to any state which hold a grudge or a territorial dispute with the UK or its global allies. So I see the future potential threat not confined to NATO within Europe but also to our wider global interests.
That will require the capability to project our conventional forces at size globally, and the need of our own politicians to exercise the restraint not to misuse it.
Conservatives screw up defence and get caught out by Putin in Ukraine – opposition party sticks the boot in. No news here.
Frankly, even if the promise to greatly enhance defence spending was not a tissue of lies (which it almost certainly is) I still wouldn’t vote Labour at gunpoint given where they stand on most other issues. They would run the country like a particularly deranged NUS committee.
Labour strategy for winning elections is not about policy but personal attacks. Difficult to attack Ben Wallace personally and the Ukraine policy seems solid and measured to me. This only gives Labour one option to advocate whatever is currently happening whilst infering that the Tories are asleep at the wheel. It will unfortuneately work for everyone who hasn’t a clue about defence matters.
The tories ceased to be the party for defence decades ago. They are an international embarrassment.
The smallest armed forces across the board this country has ever had, and they still talk the talk. Utter useless wretches!
Pretty sure we had no military aircraft in 1910… actually we didn’t even have an air-force! And let’s not even go back to the early 1500’s, no army or navy either! 😱
The Tories are the party for defence only as long as they are in opposition.
The moment they’re in power they forget all about it, except as a target for cuts.
The UK expenditure dropped at the end of the cold war. Currently the UK focuses on modernisation & NATO which to be fair should do the job. That said the landscape has changed recently and provided a little more clarity on what needs to happen to the Army. With the exception of the last Labour leader most politicians tend not to debate the military as both major parties tend to be in broad agreement and they don’t understand it anyway.
John Healey? Never heard of him, but I recall the disaster the last time there was a Labour MP called Healey appointed as Defence Secretary – scrapped carriers, cancelled the CVA-01 programme, cancelled TSR2, cancelled the supersonic Harrier project, cancelled the 5th Polaris sub, and came up with the plan to withdraw forces East of Aden…
Don’t be a silly billy😂
Oh yeah, and he had a stupid catchphrase too!
Game On!
“The UK is offering to train Ukrainian pilots on the use of “NATO-standard fighter jets”, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said on 8 February.
This was done as part of a wider pledge of support for Kyiv timed to coincide with the first visit to London of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
“As part of today’s talks, the prime minister will offer to bolster the UK’s training offer for Ukrainian troops, including expanding it to fighter jet pilots to ensure Ukraine can defend its skies well into the future,” Downing Street said.
“The training will ensure pilots are able to fly sophisticated NATO-standard fighter jets in the future.”
The greatest thing for Ukraine since the last thing …
💪👍
Sure.
“Britain’s security strategy must be ‘NATO first’. The first priority for Britain’s Armed Forces must be where the threats are greatest, not where the business opportunities lie. This is in the NATO area – Europe, the North Atlantic, Arctic.
So fairly clear global reach is out of scope for Labour as are our overseas protectorates like the Falklands. Looking very much like a strategy to hollow out capabilities. We don’t necessarily need carriers to cover the areas mentioned for instance it could be argued the required reach can be done with a2a refueling.
He does know our biggest NATO partner has a Pacific coast?
not where the business opportunities lie
So much defence cooperation with Japan and AUKUS seems out of scope also.
I’ve said before Subs, Tempest and Carriers won’t entirely survive the next government. Nothing in this statement gives me confidence otherwise.
And one elephant in the room is arms sales, Labour has not been shy in condemning these and would happily let China sell to our partners to claim some dubious moral high ground.
Personally I don’t favour either party.
The UK has a debt that is now 85% of GDP. When any new Government comes into office that and rising inflation will be the overarching reality. They will then rank their priorities. That is where the rubber will hit the road for the MoD because where does one really believe that defence will actually rank for Labour?
Then if there is a corresponding desire to focus on Europe and “rebuild the army” what does that mean for the navy? Things are not good for the RN today, but under this approach, they would get a whole lot worse.
Err.. you do realise the UK has the second lowest debt as a % GDP in the G7? (Only Germany which spends peanuts on defence has a lower %.)
Japan which is doubling its defence spending has a 236% debt-to-GDP ratio, and the USA has 128%.
So there is no need for the U.K. to cut back on defence.
You are not thinking like politicians do who have multiple pressures. Defence is not a priority stacked against rising inflation, rising health care costs and all the other domestic pressures. If the UK prioritizes continental defence within the defence budget, the navy will be cut. The only ace in the hole the navy has is the fact that ships are built in Britain. But even that – as history has shown – will only get you so far.
There’s a full scale war waging in Europe at the moment, defence is higher in the public consciousness than at anytime since Iraq. If there’s one thing a successful politician is aware of, it’s public sentiment.
(Look at Ben Wallace, in the time he’s been Defence Secretary he’s served under 3 prime-ministers. Not a single one has dared shuffle him, because everyone recognises what a good job he’s doing.)
Inflation isn’t rising, it peaked in October and has fallen the last 2 months and is expected to be around 5% by end of year.
NATO has always maintained that the safety of continental Europe is dependent upon control of border seas and the Atlantic in particular. The U.K. is uniquely placed to lead on this.
Since this ‘land war’ broke out the RN has announced surprise upgrades to Asters and the addition of Sea Ceptors to the T45, and a reversal on a previous decision to buy NSM for T45 and T23.
That doesn’t sound like a Navy expecting cuts.
The UK does not have the resources to “lead” both on land in Europe and at sea, so it will have to choose.
If the UK was truly concerned about “the land war ragging in Europe” it would have already started to seriously cut non-essential spending and shift it to defence. It has not done so under the Tories and it certainly won’t do so under Labour.
It’s pretty clear that the U.K. realised and chose long ago not to lead on land. Our land forces have always been expeditionary and smaller than the major nations on continental Europe.
What non essential spending do you think should be cut that hasn’t? Your childrens’ education? Your sister’s surgery? Your brother’s job building HS2? A lot of people would disagree with any definition of essential.
Even if the budget suddenly doubled overnight, you’d see very little effect for months due to the long-lead times on equipment. Which is why our reserves, particularly munitions should be larger than they are. I believe there was announcement last-year concerning increasing these.
Putin’s regime would have to become clinically insane to expand the war to attacking NATO targets. He’s struggling fighting Ukraine, let alone the most powerful military alliance in history. I don’t think we’ll need to start collecting garden gates and iron railings to melt them down to make tanks or start selling war bonds to the public.
We don’t need to lead in land warfare in Europe. The heavy lifting should be done by the US, France, Germany and Poland. But we need more than 73,000 troops and 148 tanks.
So the question the politicians should be asking is as a Government, how do we make money to combat inflation and drive prosperity. Tax cuts only work so far. Reimplementing austerity is no good, as it didn’t work the first time. So what next? Cutting defence expenditure, local services, halting civil service pay etc. A quick way to a dissatisfied electorate.
If only we followed Norway’s lead with its sovereign wealth fund!
Defence is an asset if used correctly it can create exports and tech that can be used civil sectors.
Very true. But it needs a steady drum beat of orders or we’re back to boom and bust. Where manufacturers have moved on and you have to start from scratch again.
Wrong – its now 105% of GDP at £2.25 TRILLION and with the BOE interest rate at 4% its costing us more than we spend on defence to service it. 13 years ago when the Tories took over it was only £1.12 TRILLION so it’s doubled. And with 3.7 million net immigrantsin 13 years all wanting their free NHS treatment thats where the money will go
Governments of all stripes and colours need to wise up. We are in a 1930’s situation regarding defence and potential (probable) belligerents. However, unlike the 1930’s where most of the materiel of war, (ships not included), could be produced/manufactured fairly quickly, today due to the technicality of such, procuring, building and commissioning takes so much longer.
UK to expand its Ukrainian infantry training programme to include Ukrainian Marines and Zelensky meeting RAF chiefs today to discuss setting up a British training program for Ukrainian pilots on western fast jets, but no commitment to actually supply jets. RAF training though is already stretched and im not sure how much resources could be provided even for accelerated conversion courses to western aircraft.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-extends-ukraine-military-training-to-pilots-and-marines-as-president-zelenskyy-makes-first-visit-to-the-uk-since-russian-invasion
I imagine the Ukraine would be sending experienced fast-jet pilots for conversion training. Perhaps less of an issue?
I’m wondering how obsolete those tranche 1 Typhoons are given the age of most equipment being used in the Ukraine conflict..
They are cleared to fire AMRAAM and ASRAAM. So better than anything Russia is fielding. Not much use as a bomber though.
Yes it should certainly deal with the remaining Russian Air Farce.
I was wondering if the Tranche 1 Typhoons had received the Project Centurion package for improved strike.
Zelensky would like Storm Shadow…..deeper strike than Ukraine currently has or the US is currently offering.
No, only the Tranche 2s and 3s got the modification. This was down to the older airframe, that didn’t have the same modifications starting with the T2s. Also the radar is an older model of Ceptor compared to what’s used in the T2. It would need replacing to be better for ground attack.
However, both Italy and Spain have shown that a T1 can be upgraded to a T2/3 spec.
So as-is, Tranche 1 could only be used for air superiority or maybe limited ground with the use of an external pod.
I think that would be sufficient. The main threat is to Ukraine’s ground forces coming under air-attack from the Russian air-force. It also means that they’re unlikely to use them to conduct ground attacks deep into Russian territory, which NATO fears as escalatory.
Let’s be honest they are not really obsolete. More nearing obsolescent, they would still be effectively peer against anything other than fifth generation.
There’s really not enough jets to supply, whether T1/2/3 . Certainly can’t see F35 being loaned. The training as well, I can expect that the trainee RAF fast jet pilots still awaiting to progress their careers are going to be fairly peed off if they have to stand aside and give up their training slots, further exacerbating recruitment and retention issues.
Amazingly, Sunak doesn’t seem to know this as he asks Wallace to determine what can be done in the area of fast jets. Is he really that unaware?
The 30 Tranche 1s that the RAF are disposing of would probably ensure no Russian aircraft tried CAS over the Ukraine, which is what’s needed.
As for Sunak, you can’t expect one person to know everything, that’s why we have a cabinet system. Should he also know the current number of ventilators in the NHS and engines in the fire-service? 🤷🏻♂️
Hi Sean, with respect, no I wouldn’t expect him to know exact numbers of NHS ventilators, emergency service vehicles etc., but I would expect a prime minister to have a working knowledge of ‘big ticket ‘ items such as the number of fast jet squadrons, it’s not like the RAF has dozens of them.
The T1 typhoon would do the job as you describe, but I’m not sure that really they can be spared, at least not without a one for one replacement.
I wouldn’t, because a Typhoon isn’t really a ‘big ticket’ item in the grand scheme of the British economy.
I’d expect Ben Wallace too, because he’s the Defence Secretary.
The T1 Typhoon was going already, so they obviously can be spared in the MoDs view. They were built to down Russian aircraft, let the Ukrainians do it.
Yeah, it’s just that the MoD’s view seems to be often informed by the Treasury’s view. Which invariably means cutbacks. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating withholding air power to Ukraine, just not further denuding RAF fast jet numbers.
The other side is the kind of multi domain training that Nato air forces practice – ISTAR, JTAC, AEW, EW etc. that allows the full combat utility of these aircraft to be utilised. Perhaps I’m wrong but I’m not sure Ukraine has that ability. Certainly the previous ‘shock and awe’ Western air campaigns were the end result of years and years of hi tempo training.
If be pragmatic, it it requires temporarily denuding the RAF then so be it. If the Ukrainians excel then there might not be any Russian aircraft left for the RAF to worry about.
I’m pretty sure NATO is already providing AEW etc at the moment. It was a NATO aircraft that confirmed the identity of the Moskva before the Ukranians sank it with missiles.
I hope that you’re right Sean in the case that there might not be any Russian aircraft left to worry about. That said though, I do think that those 30 or so T1’s may come in handy should the northern horizons suddenly become thick with Blackjack and Bear aircraft.
Well I’m pretty sure there’ll be plenty of NATO, plus Swedish and Finish, aircraft queuing up to blow those old Blackjacks and Bears out of the sky even before they reach U.K. airspace.
And then they have the RAF to deal with.
I don’t see why Russian aircraft losses can’t be as great as their tank and armoured vehicle losses…
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/09/europe/1000-russian-tanks-destroyed-ukraine-war-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
Am I hallucinating? Is a Labour politician actually speaking in favour of defence? Does he mean it? Do I believe him? Are Labour actually more defence-orientated than the Tories? At the moment it seems that way. I think I need a sit-down.
You’re hallucinating due to a lack of alcohol. I prescribe that you pour yourself a beer before that sit-down 😉
Or better yet a nice vintage port. It’s warming this time of year.
ooo that reminds me….tawny port …mmmmmmm
Yes a nice tawny port hits the spot as well.
Each to their own, I’d either go for 7 year old Havana Club rum or Zubrowka Bison Grass vodka 🤷🏻♂️
A nice rum will do it. Not been a vodka drinker for about 20 years after an incident with a bottle of vodka and gin after a few at the pub.
A layman’s view , we should have a UK defence force , to defend the realm , an industry to supply equipment and weapons . No more NLAWS until 2024 is nuts, where is the small arms industry . The primary role is defence of the UK , even if that means conscription and part time soldiers , sailors and airmen , a national guard of you like .
A smaller expeditionary force to fulfil NATO and overseas commitments .
Mcfeagle wrote:
Thats not true and simply misinformation from the Shadow defence minister designed to make him and his party look good. The production of NLAWs is still ongoing, 500 were supplied to the Uk last year, another 500 is set for this year and in April 2022 the UK signed a deal with Sweden to increase production of the NLAW
The NLAWS statement is just wrong.
We already have ‘part time soldiers, sailors and airmen’ though that’s somewhat a derogatory term. The Army Reserve (former Territorials), the Royal Naval Reserve, the RAF Reserves, and Special Forces Reserves.
The U.K. forces are already configured as an expeditionary force, arguably have been since Napoleonic times…
We only have had conscription in world wars, and for a time (to 1960) to maintain a presence in the Empire in its sunset days. Conscription has more disadvantages than advantages.
Defence of the UK is interesting – the RAF do a good job of defending airspace, the Navy has enough vessels to protect coastline and approaches. But the army is the problem – insufficient troops, especially infantry, in most parts of the country and little focus on Military Home Defence (MHD) planning, training and defence stores.
However little real threat to the homeland, even from Russia.
Tranche 1 Typhoons to Ukrain anyone?
Since it was announced it is actually possible to upgrade them, I can see Sunak giving them away as an excuse for not even needing to consider paying to upgrade them. Anything to avoid spending on defence.
To see him and Zelensky together today is a bit farcical. One a leader fighting for his countries survival, the other an accountant who despises spending a penny on defending his country. Hardly a meeting of the minds…
Marked wrote:
He’s a investment Banker, that’s how their minds work
Yes it has now been admitted that tranche 1 can be upgraded, but Bae have not costed . New builds would probably be cheaper but as has been suggested the PM and Chancellor would veto such a move.
Are German and Italian IDS and ECR Tornados + Storm Shadow a possibility? Do we have any in storage? The Ukrainians need deep strike. And air launched Brimstone would be useful.
What Ukraine needs right now is air dominance of its territorial airspace. Tornado is a mud mover and would change the battlefield landscape. However I cannot see the Germans or Italians for that matter even consider this option. A single type such as the F16 or Grippen would simplify training and logistics and the numbers would be greater. Tranche 1 Typhoon is principally an air defence aircraft. The Typhoon GR4 is jack of all trades and we do not have enough in service.
Ukrainian fighter pilots could easily convert to Typhoon.
Understand what you say. Something like F16, Gripe makes sense. Just putting 2 and 2 together and maybe getting 5. The UK talk of considering ‘long range missiles’ and fighter jets. Tornado + Storm Shadow gives orders of magnitude strike reach versus the latest US ground launched SDB- 150km. Just one squadron could wreck Russian supply lines.
Storm shadow is cleared on Typhoon.
We don’t keep any kit that has been formally declared Obsolete and replaced by a successor. Old kit is sold, gifted or scrapped ASAP.
There are no ex-RAF Tornados in storage,any remaining are Museum exhibits and Scrap Metal donors only.
Well that simplifies that. Thx
Paul,
I don’t think the Uk will be able to hand over Storm shadow due to the Missile Technology Control Regime which limits the sale (or handover) of missiles to a range of 300 miles. If the Uk (one of the original countries behind the act) handed over such, it would open the door to a lot of others to start flogging their wares.
Farouk,
Always note your well informed comments and don’t want to query you
I was going to say Storm shadow range is 350m Pity they don’t have a self destruct at 299m! Then I saw on Wikipedia that the lo lo export version has a range of 155 miles.
On a different slant Ukraine will needs more advanced attack helicopters to go along with the new tanks and AFV’s
We have been recently retiring the 67 Apache AH64D’s for 50 AH64Es
Do you know if any would be available?
Smickers,
Yes you are correct, there is an export version, but I do believe they are made to order and are downgraded on the production line. The ones the RAF have, are longer ranged. Not sure if they can be downgraded, but I’m pretty sure that Moscow would cry foul play and use any such handover to allow themselves and others to bypass the MTCR.
Regards advanced tanks and AH64D, best get a move on, as it appears that Moscow has launced a new offensive.
I didn’t know that. Thx. I read on wiki that France sold a shorter range version they called Black Shaheen to the UAE. It’s range was limited to 290km to comply with the Technology Control Regime. Still a valuable increase over the ground launched missiles they have been offered.
Wiki also says it has been sold to Saudi, India, Qatar and Greece. It refers to the Missile Technology Control Regime as ‘guidelines’ . I think Zelensky is pushing for it…doing his job, right?
Personally I’m still not over the premiere league to be honest, the slow death of grass roots football.
My team, AFC Wimbledon, bucking that trend.
All this talk but end of the day it’s all about the defence budget – listen to the news any day and estimate how much the government is being asked to spend on a given day, NHS one day, defence the next, benefits the following.
Will the next labour government spend more defence and less on ????
Labour will be true to form. Money will go to the NHS, public services etc. Because the unions and The Blob smell big public spending opportunities. That is a vote catcher, and, people are war weary. Trusting any politician of any shade to do anything that does not involve self/party interests is just plain daft.
Sorry, newbie here. Are the tranche 1 typhoons capable of anything more than Air to Air such as supporting storm shadow or brimstone?
I hope this is a sincere statement by Labor. If so its about damn time. The Conservatives have squandered their legacy on defense.
They certainly have. I am dismayed by the talk of donating Typhoons to Ukraine. Surely we have so few that there are none to spare. Tornado was retired early and Typhoons numbers are limited. My guess is that the RAF has about 130 max. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Why? Typhoons we’re built to fight the Russians, at least in Ukraine they’re doing that.
The Tornadoes were knackered.
The RAF has 139 Typhoons, around 100 operational.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/915018/ODS_UK_Armed_Forces_Equipment_and_Formations_2020_tables.ods
Any increase should be on conventional weapons as that is where the weakness lies – total madness to be cutting back on Typhoon and Transporter type numbers
The long and short of it is politics. As with many things defence planning and procurement doesn’t mesh well with a 5 year political cycle and parties trying to win / avoid losing power.
We need to take longer term strategic planning out of the hands of short term government planning. You need decades to train people up, establish great supply chains and bring equipment into service – this needs stability, experience and sustained investment and frankly I just don’t think the current political settlement can do this.
Last time I looked we had a 10-year Long Term Equipment Plan drawn up by MoD but of course the politicians meddle with that every 5 years at least.
We may be not simply “competing with China” but fighting for our freedom, survival & whole way of life. Think the last few years in Hong Kong but on a larger & more brutal scale.
It’s great Labour are finally acknowledging the pit we’ve been digging for the nation & world by our rampant cutting of our forces as major authoratarian forces at home & abroad are at work. Things could go tits up very quickly unless we raise our guard PDQ & take opuir responsabilities to not just our own national security, but to being a permanent member of the UN security council a whole lot more seriously.
The Canadians tried that. It was not popular and they have rowed back a long way since then to re-establish individual service ethos.
We need more of everything for.all the forces. We need hypersonic missiles urgently.And a good anti missile defence system for the whole.country. And to get all this we need to increase the defence budget by between 4% and 8%.