Well, now, what have we here? Only a few weeks into our new Labour government and already there are signs that their manifesto pledges may not be realised.
It was ever thus, a cynic would say.
Nowhere is this mismatch between pre-election promises and post-election pragmatism more apparent than in the field of defence. The Labour manifesto promised to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP from its present approximately 2.2% but refrained from naming a definite timeframe, merely saying “when circumstances allow.”
This was, and is, a blatant cop-out – the circumstances may never arrive. Now we learn that, faced with the reality of government finances, Chancellor Rachel Reeves is having to look at some hard and probably extremely unpopular choices. Spending cuts or tax rises? Or both?
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
As far as the MoD is concerned, the outlook does not look great. Not only is there a reputed “black hole” of £16.9 billion in projected defence finances over the next ten years, but money has now got to be found for an additional £400 million this financial year to meet service pay increases, funds that have to be found from within the existing MoD budget.
In the face of this fiscal onslaught, service chiefs recently gave defence suppliers just 36 hours to come up with lists of potential savings that could be made on existing projects. Apparently, the letter sent to defence contractors spoke of the need for “high level, headline ideas” and expressed regret over the “hard choices” needed to be made and the alacrity of response requested.
At the same time, civil servants have been told that the MoD faces further deep cuts to its budget for modernising the armed forces of up to 20% this financial year. Officials fear that this will be a major setback for all three services’ plans and that they will fall further behind potential adversaries in the coming years.
Programmes under threat include the Minerva satellite procurement, which involves launching satellites into space to improve Britain’s information gathering and sharing capabilities, plus the Tempest future aircraft programme, a joint venture with Italy and Japan.
It might seem counterintuitive to be slashing defence spending at the very time when tensions are heightened around the globe, and of course that’s just exactly what it is. In a period described by some as “pre-war,” the UK continues with the atrophying of its armed forces.
Service chiefs must be tearing their hair out (if they have any left) at such nonsense, but if the government can’t provide the money within existing structures, there’s not much they can do about it. This is a political problem, not a military one. It’s obvious that, in the face of demands for additional funding from a myriad of departments, the Labour government has placed defence on a lower priority rating than others.
In doing so, they are either oblivious to the obvious risks or happy to gamble with national security at a time fraught with danger. History will be their judge, but let’s just hope we’re not caught with our pants down!
Good old labour. Never trust a politician, left or right they are all corrupt lying cockroaches.
Why blame Labour, they haven’t been in power long enough to be behind any of this and the Conservatives weren’t promising any increase in the current parliament.
Blaming policticans fine though.
I remember what Labour did with our forces when they were in charge. The effects of which still massively impact my own and other families today through injuries sustained in conflicts we should not have been involved in. The lied to us all about WMDs in Iraq which got us into a war which cost endless sums of money and led to hundreds of thousands dying and millions of people displaced. All that money and lives lost in Iraq and Afghanistan for what exactly? Achieved nothing apart from the birth of terror cells like ISIS and destabilised the entire region.… Read more »
The conservatives had committed to 2.5% by 2030, which is the end of the current parliament. Typical Labour lies.
And Labour have decided to prioritise public service pay rises to keep their union paymasters happy and obedient, as well as commitments to £17bn per year on foreign aid which seems to be extremely ineffectual, so they are very open to criticism when it comes to the neglect of defence.
2030 would be after the next election. Aka after which all the current PMs if they had won would have retired. Promising something 2 parliaments in the future means your not promising anything.
One reason – large pay rises for train drivers and doctors, not funded from existing budget. Modest pay rise for service personnel, funded from existing defence budget.
Spot the difference?
Train drivers are not paid by the treasury, the train companies were privates years ago. Doctos are badly needed by the country to keep people working which in turn rises tax. Not really an argument.
Wrong. The government has refused to say how the train drivers pay rise will be funded. It is likely that much of the cost will fall on taxpayers. The only other source is increased fares because there is no productivity improvement.
Doctors funding is 100% by the taxpayer.
The point that seems to have eluded you is that the armed forces pay rises have to be funded from the existing budget. The others don’t. It offers a clear ( except to you) indication of future priorities.
How is it going to fall on the tax payer? They are employees of privately run companies mm?
p.s. it all comes from the existing budget (well other than train drivers which come out of the shareholders profits) as it comes from the treasury. The treasury doesn’t have spare money lying around.
Plus there is a defence review coming early next year, let’s wait to see what that looks like and then judge. I fear the worst but I believe in fact and we don’t have them yet.
Lee,good on you telling the way it is,WE ARE IN THE BROWN STUFF ,Politicians, all of them are the same ,self interest, feathering one’s nest and treat those who voted for them with contempt and they are all COCKROACHES
Erm this has been going on for a long time. Labour have only recently been in power for a few weeks. What about the previous 14 years? The Labour government before this are no longer around. A child is not responsible for its father’s sins.
Yes a very long time including under labour before the tories as I already commented below. Like Blair and co who should be put in front of the Hague. Anyone who believes a politician or a political party is a fool just ask the pensioners who voted for Labour in the election. If you believe any politician you must believe in fairytales and loch ness monster. Regardless of what party they represent they lie constantly and do what they need to do for self interest. That piece of paper you tick in favour of your chosen party would be better… Read more »
Why am I not surprised the Tories were just the same though.
To be totally fair after the Camerloon taking away from Defence to give to foreign aid nonsense – apparently you can stop a missile with soft power projection in Camerloon world….who knew?….Doris did make increasing defence a priority.
This sounds very bad shoe horning pay into existing budgets and cutting the stretched capital budgets.
Can someone remind Reeves of the NAO’s recommendation that sliding defence spending to the right increases long term costs…..always….please?
Cameron’s NGO aid organisation chum’s liked the pay rise !
Meanwhile the enemy within continues to grow day by day🙄
Who is the enemy within? Pray tell
Possibly the 2 to 5 thousand Islamists that the Security Service has investigated, has had under surveillance, or is aware of for their views which run counter to the country that hosts them? And the assorted CND, SWP, and far left supporters who see nothing at all wrong with having a nation where a % of its populace have zero loyalty to the nation they reside in due to continued unlimited mass immigration which, while indeed having some benefits regards those who integrated ( like my Dad ) many others have no such compulsion and which will only create further… Read more »
Well that was a bit better than I could have put👍
And multiply that by the same or similar types in Germany, France, USA, most of the rest of NATO and Australia.
lol a country of 70 million is afraid of 5 thousand people, ridiculous, but that’s the UK
Read Mao, he would have been ecstatic if he had 5000 dedicated to his cause in the population of mainland Japan…it’s called political warfare and china considers it the single most decisive part of any war. It’s why China has millions of internal security personal to counter that and 3 million political warfare personnel actively attacking other nations in that way.
Tullzter, the UK is a tiny little island and you’re saying 70 million people is not enough? And where are we going to squeeze the 5,000 extra people who may be a security risk. We’re busting at the seams already. On another related note; on 28 August 2024 there were 10 boats with 614 ‘irregular’ migrants on board – in one day alone! How many of them are security risks?
There’s none so blind as those that don’t want to see👍
weird how your own govt’ stats say that 95% of crimes committed in major British cities are committed by British born citizens…..but yeah i guess you know better lol
You are not supposed to remind them of that. Immigrants are a useful scapegoats for the mentally challenged.
Did you think of that one yourself or did you have help?
Oh I managed it all by myself !!
Well you really shouldn’t be proud it that now should you😂
You are right, there is no particular challenge in seeing through the right wing BS.
82.56% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Brilliant, made my day! 😅
Well as we were talking about terrorists this stupid old pensioner has seen quite enough thank you two tours of NI having to dig bodies out of ruined pubs that had been bombed,hearing the whistle go off in the Ardoyne to warn the locals to get out of the way because some ‘freedom fighter’ was about to have a pop at us,burying a comrade in Tidworth cemetery because he made the mistake of going through a hole in a hedge he knew he shouldn’t have done! you laughed at Danielle when he said 5/6k on a watch list!how many did… Read more »
From someone who works in that field it’s true (a rarity for government stats), pure blooded Brits are behind the overwhelming majority of offending. The good old multi generational family of disfuntional crap that hasn’t done a honest day’s work since the Doomsday book was written.
In crime terms immigrants are the least of our problems.
Though it’s true that in amongst these boats there are going to be a handful of dangerous people.
Don’t think anyone was disputing that fact the conversation was about terrorism.
Sadly believable.
With the demise of neighbourhood cops the local knowledge to pop up and say
Alo Alo sunshine what are you up?
Is lost….deterrence policing did errrr deter?
There’s a difference between being British born and actually being culturally British.If you’re born into an environment that is completely indifferent or even hostile to British culture it’s irrelvant which post code you were born in.
Is that why Home Office stopped releasing migrant crime figures.
Well the prison population statistics contradict your “facts”.
British born covers all ethnicities so is just a phrase used to disguise the origins of criminals. Prison population breakdown is readily available.
Respectfully, anyone who knows history can tell you it is often the active and effective minority that changes things, not a passive/naive majority.
As is clearly happening here today in the PC and WOKE lot change things. Soon it will be too late. We are spending BILLIONS on those coming her illegally yet our pensioners can hardly make ends meat. But the lefty Gov will give ever more to those that have done nothing to deserve it whilst true Brits waste away. Great Britain, long gone never to return.
Do you want me to list the bombings, killings, vehicle rammings, and suicide attacks that an even smaller minority have committed since the late 90s. That approx number, which id read of, includes their sympathisers. Previously British citizens were worried about the IRA. Any number of people within a country that wish to do that country and its people harm is a concern, and all you can do is LOL? I’ve written you off as irrelevant to the conversation if you have that sort of attitude. Imagine if I’d actually lost family to these these people? And you lol. Are… Read more »
Did i get a confrontational statement? no i got a short sighted and dumb take from a seemingly xenophobic pensioner, the enemy is within, yes, it is within your head, the enemy has a name, he’s called “delusions”
“Did I get a confrontational statement?”
No, you got a reply answering your confrontational post to Jacko.
“seemingly xenophobic pensioner,”
One, I’m 52, not quite there.😀 Two, I may shortly be taking in a Kenyan Lodger, nothing Xenophobic about me T at all.
As for delusions and being in my head, I only wish it were true!
Anyway, we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.
4,5 years for me to go Daniele! Pension is a wonderful thing, or so my wife tells me, she seem to be enjoying hers!
2.5 for me, as I fully intend to be part time or retired by 55. Box is hanging on still, and my jobs shifts are getting harder.
55- you lucky sod 😉
You’re naive beyond belief. Small numbers of extremists can do untold economic damage, which can hold back every aspect of life in a country; from underfunded public services, to no commercial enterprises willing to risk their businesses by setting up shop in at risk places. Take it from someone who lives in Northern Ireland, a place still dealing with the effects of an extreme minority generations after the hot confict has ended.
You forgot the ‘lol’, lol
Why is when challenged and taken to tasks, posters like you revert to name calling and child like comments. I must admit, however, your response is very typical of the presumptuous and never like being wrong left wingers, who see right wingers around every corner and under their bed every night!
How about each of the 5000 with a bomb? Still ridiculous? I don’t think so.
The concept of what Daniele has said has clearly gone over your head. One person can cause considerable damage to both infrastructure and people, hundreds and thousands can compound that effort and danger, all the while supported by a larger percent of the population due to their heritage and religion. Try to make more of an effort at understanding current and future threats. Thanks.
Very well put and completely agree
2 to 5 thousand who are known in a growing community of 3 million +
They are loyal only to others of the same faith.
We should put M.I.5 to work investigating everything associated, with the Muslim Council of Britain, religious-based charities, and specialist immigration lawyers.
There is a whole network of organisations set up to proselytize Islam and facilitate ways for more people of that faith to come to the UK, worse still is all this is being cheered on by the extreme left/woke mob.
I’d not go that far mate, I’d hope there are plenty of Muslims loyal to the UK as well as their faith.
A big issue is i believe their faith “looks the other way” when there are baduns growing within their communities and also the sheer number of immigrants generally coming to the UK, and wider Europe.
But that’s a different issue, I was talking specifically of those hostile to the west.
I’m not so sure, if your whole life revolves around the strict observation of a belief system then you probably won’t have been inclined to support any ideas outside of it or any cultural deviation from the ‘righteous path’.
Whereas I have met some forward-looking, or if you like ‘moderate’ people of that faith, it appears the majority prefer to segregate and not become too westernised as it would distract them or turn them away from the faith.
I’m way more concerned by the few hundred white supremacists/racists causing all the issues recently and embedded in our media. Our problems are far closer to home.
I would be too if they were going round blowing people up en masse and engaging in suicide bombings like the militant Islamists. Thankfully I only recall the N Zealand and Norway attacks in that regard.
You don’t have to blow people up to cause significant harm to peoples lives and their freedom due to it. The culture wars are causing way more harm than terror ever has in the uk.
Not down playing the risk to terrorism but right now its less to a risk to our culture and way of life than the current fruitcakes are causing.
Why are you more concerned by a few hundred white supremacists? They don’t seem to have any hold on society?
And who even are these people you’re talking about?
There are people in our country that are scared to leave their homes after it. The uk has also been massively downgraded in global surveys of safe and inclusive places to live hitting expats and foreign investment, so yeah it’s hitting the country hard.
“Embedded in our media”. Is this anti-semitism? Lol
Pretty much anti everything these days that isn’t white British, which depresses me as i was always proud that our country was so multi cultural taking the best parts around the world.
We haven’t had unlimited mass migration! Comments like that detract from the important point you are trying to make.
Really Nick? Look at migration watch statistics, or look at the population boom from 1972 when I was born and now, and get back to me. What was the population of this nation in 1972? What is the population now? And baby boom my **** the figures jump from 1997 onwards. Google “Migration Watch Statistics” I’d link it, but will fall into moderation. The population of this nation goes up by around 1 million or more every 4 years. Talking immigration is not illegal, or racist, nor should be suppressed like some on the left want, so how does my… Read more »
Yes you can speak, I wasn’t saying you couldn’t. We haven’t had mass migration recently. Which is what anyway? And how did Britain get to be populated in the first place (a long time ago)? The general points you make are reasonable and cause concern but to ensure they get listened do not exaggerate. In any case it is largely the failure to integrate that really creates the problem.
Nick. I don’t mean to exaggerate and I don’t believe I did.
Yes, you’re last sentence is the single most important thing.
Support the UK, its people, its culture, and it matters not what your background or colour is.
I think you’ll find it is the term ‘mass’ that is the problem. Over a period of time there are has been a high number or migrants yes but in proportion to the population, not so much. The term ‘mass’ implies a huge number over a short period of time, but also huge is relative anyway. What is more concerning is the high number of young men involved!
Hi Nick.
Point accepted. Ok, shall we just say I think immigration is too high since the mid 90s!
And yes, that’s another thing, very few women and children compared to young men. Is that a culture thing? No idea.
Shouldn’t women and children outnumbering men also flee as a refugee or an economic migrant?
Now why is that, with regards to the small boats especially, are they mostly young males? That point dovetails into my main security issue I was trying to make to Tullizer earlier.
For me, immigration is an issue that has defence implications.
Perhaps because fleeing is in and of itself a risky activity, so women, especially women with children, are in a much less viable position to flee. (And when it comes to small boats the risk calculous is even worse). If you want to redress the balance then providing safe routes for women and children to use helps.
Of course I’m sure the Mosley Voters would then freak out with their great replacement conspiracies.
Ah, Dern. You’re back. Noticed you’d not been on, assumed an Ex.
Thank you, that makes some sense, if the person arriving is fleeing an active war zone. Though believe many are not, so that may not always apply.
The real argument! Agreed.
Nick, think you are making too much of the word ‘mass’ to maybe for the sake of point scoring against Daniele. you said yourself it is relative so it is fair to say that in many places it is mass. You challenge the use of the word by reasoning it with averages. People move when they arrive and often to specific urban areas of cities and towns, some places will seem like mass influx where other places hardly at all, even in the City I am from, 15% of people (so excludes people who are illegal and not registered) are… Read more »
I don’t do point scoring. I try to defuse inflammatory arguments and bring them back to earth. Exaggeration does not help the argument or debate and directly leads to the unrest recently seen. It is all part of misinformation or ‘rumour-mongering’ for some else’s ends exploiting fear! Also called click-bait.
Your gallant mission to ‘defuse inflammatory arguments and bring them back to earth’ was not needed on this occasion, but agree that a fair and rational argument should always be sought.
That is very, very well put Wasp.
Yes, agree. A local impact right there, with no government ever asking if it is ok.
Now that is a truthful and open response Daniele.
A great pity and a shame politicians cannot be as sincere.
Well china has 3 million political warfare officers trying to craft that enemy…in a cruder way Russia is doing the same and impacting on peoples faith in western governments ( I had a conversation with a guy not long ago who was completely convinced that democracy was the enemy ). In its own way Islamic extremism is a massive internal security risk as is far right activism.. The truth is our extern enemy ( china, Iran and other Islamist groups, Russian) don’t really care what causes they use to create internal disruption and mistrust…it’s simply misstrust..during the riots china would… Read more »
Well some of us here have been warning of this for years, Labour are no different to the Tories and might end up being an awful lot worse.
Sadly so.
We will be mourning the grown up Ben Wallace days soon.
I reckon the £400m current year savings requested is less than 1% of the defence budget so should be doable. I think its also expected that contractors will share some of the pain. I assume the reference to a 20% reduction means a reduction in current year capital spend. It would be good to know what new equipment acquisitions are planned this year. Does this mean IOC dates for Boxer or ship launches or F-35 deliveries move back a quarter in 2025? Not a disaster but more serious if the 20% for this year is going to be extended to… Read more »
Of course 1% is doable. So is 2% or 5% or even 50%. Any idiot Chancellor can cut budgets with the support of a big majority in parliament. They just say do it and the civil servants will do it. Civil servants might argue the toss a bit in a Sir Humphreyish way, but probably not too much. However, choices have consequences that we’ll all have to live with. Except perhaps for ex-PMs and Chancellors who quit after they mess up, and propped up by their new titles and excessive pensions, flounce off on a book-signing tour. You don’t grow… Read more »
It’s being done sensibly by asking the contractors for ideas. Same approach as the pensioner heating issue where they asked the energy companies to come up with ways of protecting vulnerable customers. The defence contractors will probably come up with pragmatic suggestions. As regards growth, as the saying goes, growth is vanity, profit is sanity.
The government is cutting AND is asking contractors to come up with more.
The saying normally goes “turnover is vanity, profit is sanity but cash is king”. That is great advice to new companies, the majority of failures are due to cash flow, and chasing growth through revenue expansion at the expense of profit may well be bad business. However, UK Plc isn’t a startup, and we can’t fire surplus population to slim down. Growth is essential, not least to match the increasing population.
The cash is king bit is relevant for a labour govt I think. We have a problem with population demographics. Too many inactive elderly and too few young families. We have become economically addicted to immigration of ready built tax payers rather than incentivising the raising of a family. The UK has 12 million pet dogs – substitute children.
FV432 extension programme incoming.
😁
Plenty of Universal carriers still knocking about; perhaps they could use those?
well at least they still work and are a known quantity compared to the costly Ajax etc etc
Have you any idea how much it costs to slow down contracted programs? You have to compensate the contractor for lost profits and pay their extended costs and overheads. Yes, really you do. It will cost far more in future years that you ever save – probably 2-3X. Because you would have to release contractors from fixed costs elements and accept inflation and other cost increases. Before you start talking about forcing contractors to swallow it they would be perfectly entitled to make a civil claim in the courts for Repudiation of Contract or Unjust Enrichment or An Act of… Read more »
I would guess that’s the reason they are asking the contractors rather than ‘imposing’ delays. There are accounting tricks; creative use of accruals.
I was just listening to a Sitrep podcast and they were suggesting that maybe the most in danger would be the MLRS upgrades.
Postpone spend planned for current year, right; not cancellation?
Very true. It cost a huge amount when HM Treasury slowed down the carrier programme.
Put one Carrier along side and you save that easily. In reserve of course with a small crew to keep things oiled and turned over so she would be easily brought back into service. Been done before.
Thx. Depends on whether we were planning to do that anyway, I suppose. My point was just that there’s no need to panic.
If, purchance, the upcoming Strategic Defence Review results are truly as grim as speculation portends, it may be time to adopt a radically different foreign and defence posture. Either signal an armed neutrality (e.g., Austria or Switzerland) or adopt the attitude of the Canadians, Italians Portuguese, Spanish, etc., and simply ignore NATO defence spending goals. There do not appear to be any negative consequences meted out to non-performng members of NATO at this time, and the credible members may indeed come to the aid of the non-performing members if Article 5 is invoked. 🤞 Alternatively, no one appears to wish… Read more »
Austrian neutrality is a wee bit different in that it was essentially enforced by international treaty as it was a fully occupied enemy state until 1955,and the treaty still stands..even Austria joining the EU was controversial.
Presume you are espousing the difference between voluntary v. involuntary neutrality? For the purpose of my argument, the pathway does not matter, simply the current status.
Indeed outcome wises it’s essentially the same, but I consider enforced neutrality is a wee bit different morally from a nation simply turning its back on its responsibilities and natural allies ( hears looking at you Ireland) . Enforced neutrality tends to happen as a product of benefiting all ( such as the negotiated withdrawal of the “Allies” from Austria).
Perhaps instead of insisting, unrealistically, that every NATO member go for 2% or whatever, it would be sensible to divide states into tiers within NATO. Claiming that, say, Canada or Portugal or Spain are “free riders” on NATO is silly because these states have no serious threat beyond the shared consequences of a World War III. Such minor members of NATO are essentially participating to maintain good relations with the rest of the alliance and because every little bit does help in deterrence, but expecting them to have the same enthusiasm as the other tiers is simply a denial of… Read more »
Believe your post is an accurate description of current reality, as opposed to the proclaimed NATO policy. But the 2% of GDP minimum expenditure rate on defence was voluntarily adopted as policy by all the sovereign members. There is no proscription against non-performing members bringing a revision in policy to a vote. Firmly believe the voting publics in the policy abiding states will eventually resent the non-perfirming states. Deem this to be manifestly human nature, virtually everyone resents being taken advantage of/played for a fool. Trump has successfully addressed this sentiment of a plurality of the American electorate, regardless of… Read more »
Good point that it was agreed on — albeit largely by different governments than those in power now – although for those below 2%, I think the latest NATO agreement was “we’ll move gradually to 2%” (gradually , i.e., after we’re out of office and the next administration can suck it up). Trump’s rhetoric may perhaps have some positive effects in scaring Germans into spending more on defense but does tend to also feed isolationism, which is not necessary a good thing, as whenever the Americans have retreated, the result has tended to be a World War; the same rhetoric… Read more »
I think if anything Trumps rhetoric will have negatives effects on German defence spending because they tend to see “doing the opposite of what Trump wants them to do.” as pretty desirable.
The language you are usingis rather telling.
For starters the 2% of GDP was not a minimum, it was a target that was agreed upon by defence ministers of various governments (most of which are no longer in power). It wasn’t “everyone must spend 2% right away” it was “We are aiming to get everyone to spend 2% in 10 years time.”
Secondly the voting publics really wouldn’t care about the 2% guideline, if it wasn’t for American Isolationist Demagogues deliberately misrepresenting what it is, and trying to rile the American Public up about it.
Ummm…argument that successor governments should not be bound by thetreaty actions/commitments of previous governments may not be valid, and, if unilateral, may induce instability and mistrust between treaty partners. Expenditure target was adopted in 2014 w/ a glideslope for universal adoption by 2024. Approximately one quarter of NATO governments have not met that goal, nor, in some cases, evinced much interest in future compliance. Not a fan of the Donald’s personality and/or temperament, but his argument that the financial burden should be shared more equally does resonate w/ a percentage of the American electorate. Democratic candidate will maintain the status… Read more »
Governments are almost never bound by agreements made by previous governments, especially budgetary ones. That’s not a “may induce instability” that’s a fact. The number of times multinational defence projects have failed because one or the other party has cut the funding is beyond count. The issue isn’t European spending, it’s American isolationist politicians looking for a cudgel to whip up their voting base. As you said it was a target. Aka “We hope to get here by 2024” not a “minimum” not a “membership fee” and not a “we will start having reprocussions for anyone not meeting that spending… Read more »
A very interesting post, especially as you are from overseas and canb be more dispassionate. I think that even after whatever cuts happen, we will still have one of the largest Defence budgets in Europe, and would not have to adopt such a radical idea as to ‘go neutral’, which would mean leaving NATO. We are a founder member of NATO and enjoy considerable protection from being a member. In the world, only Trump thinks that if Article 5 is called then members should not aid a member that had not met the 2% target. It is more likely that… Read more »
Trumps rhetoric is stupid and is clearly desgined for American voters who’ve never seen a map of Europe. Somehow Russia is going to invade Spain without attacking any other NATO member so America can withhold aid since they don’t spend 2%?
No.
Believe that it is in ENATO’s enlightened self-interest to develop a real, robust, semi-independent, defensive capability of CW I stature. Entails a requirement of CW I era level of investment. Europeans largely unaware/unconcerned that Xi has mandated PLA be ready for war by 2027. If the balloon indeed goes up, US will be preoccupied w/ Indo-Pacific croc(s). European theater will be a secondary priority. In WW II European theater emphasized, at the expense of the Pacific. Predict role reversal for the next round.
It’s difficult to be hopeful when it comes to Defence budget .Our Armed forces deserve so much better from lack of Manpower Equipment housing etc .Seems no Will from any party to give them there due ,but they are the best 🇬🇧
“ let’s hope we are not caught with our pants down”. It is a racing certainty we will be.!!!! Unfortunately blaming the previous government will be a very hollow excuse when it happens. Both projects are badly needed and in the case of Tempest, not only will it screw up relations for decades to come with two important allies , it will waste an opportunity for the British airspace industry to once again get on the front foot and cost tens of thousands of highly skilled, virtually impossible to replace jobs. British Aerospace will never recover. My only hope is… Read more »
Stopping Tempest would be high level idiocy and waste. If things are getting desperate why not pair up with either Europe and or a US partner even if you lose a bit of control?
Same with the T83. I read the other day, on Janes i think, that Germany and Denmark are looking at AAW destroyer collaboration, so is there a tri-partnership possibility here with UK considering our defence relationship with former and A140/T31 with the later?
“ Stopping Tempest would be high level idiocy and waste” Since when has decisions regarding defence matters ever been conducted with any degree of intelligence. With the barbarians at the gate we will still be in a state of utter denial. With the Franco/ German effort mired in politics (no surprise) .,The Americans put a hold on both and thinking about modular fighters ( great on paper , not so great in practice) . The export potential for Tempest is huge. It will pay for its development costs many times over and give U.K. aerospace a head start on the… Read more »
Yeah because we invented social media and it has made people brain dead morons and we have not done the smart and shut down social media permanently
You will get no argument from me.
Dutch actually and building ever bigger Ships that are really Cruisers not Frigates. More smaller units means you can have more at sea and available. The RN’s Rivers can do much more than they are now just by fitting good available kit. But at mo they are delivering way above their size by being around compared to broken alongside with Ships well past their best. T23’s should all have been replaced by now and the T26 is hopefully a suitable replacement but note it carries the same kit as the T23’s in the end, is that really and advance?????????? As… Read more »
Tempest is already a colloaborative programme (with Japan).
Isn’t Tempest already UK-Japan-Italy? Or have I missed some news?
It maybe TSR2 again sadly 😟
I do get the feeling that this is the Wilson government all over again; a government whose defence policy was so inept, MI5 began to believe that Wilson was a Soviet agent.
Many think we were under-strength for our operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and that was the major reason we did not do that well. With more reductions we will certainly be caught with our pants down for any major conflict.
If Tempest goes surely BAE will not go under – they have lots of other work ranging from civilian aircraft to military vehicles and submarines.
I never said or implied would, I did clearly said it would put at risk, tens of thousand of highly skilled jobs.
There is a vast difference between Afghanistan and a near peer conflict , where we still had an armed forces to where we are today.
Fighting the Taliban is no where near analogous to China or North Korea or dare I say it Russia.
Certainly there is a difference. I did not suggest the sandbox wars were the same as a near peer conflict.
My point was that we were under-resourced by Government for those operations and did not do well, (and our casualty rate was higher than many other particpants pro rata).
Some US officers considered we ‘failed’ in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I was trying to post a warning of going to war under-resourced and risking failure.
In near peer conflict where we were required to deploy larger forces, more equipment and more combat supplies, we would be in even worse trouble.
Unfortunately our political “ elite” do not listen to our senior officers when it comes to military matters let alone the armchair brigade here. So we doomed to ignore the lessons of the past. I thought FINALLY we might have got a government who put defence of the realm in its proper place on the priority list. Unfortunately the words from Starmer and Healey were just that, words, even in the face of clear and present danger from several quarter is not enough to persuade them to do the right thing. My only hope is that Robertson as ex NATO… Read more »
They had better not row back, china is watching and Russia may stumble over a red line at anytime, deterrence is absolutely the single most import risk management intervention required of government at present, growth, education even health will be irrelevant if we end up fighting WW3 as at best our economy and the worlds economy will be shattered for a generation. But I’m an optimistic chap so they will get the benefit of the doubt until I read the new defence review white paper see what that says and then secondly if actions follow the white paper ( after… Read more »
“deterrence is absolutely the single most import risk management intervention required of government at present”
Preach it, Brother!
[For those who haven’t suddenly come over all American for no good reason, that means I agree.]
As a REME officer in a staff job, I implemented all of the changes mandated by the 97/98 SDR, as they affected my Corps.
My point in case it is not clear was that much of the 97/98 SDR was implemented in spite of 9/11 later happening (which simply caused a New Chapter of SDR to be written).
Although a lot of did not…the RN were essentially walloped hard in that regard..they were meant to retain 30+ escorts and around 12 SSNs according to that review…by the time the next full review happened the were down to 23 escorts and 8 SSNs..that’s some slippage.
A strong military is far cheaper than a war we are utterly unprepared for.
👍👍
You raised our hopes and quite expertly dashed them Sir!
What I don’t get is how the black hole in the MOD is allowed to continue to exist. They have been talked about for decades, why has neither the MOD or successive government’s not dealt with it by now.
It gets dealt with, and then another one emerges, because some other projects go over budget. Part of it is the fact that since the 2000s the UK seems intent on widely pursuing bespoke cutting edge kit that is often still under development, rather than really good off the shelf kit which could be brought into service quickly with budgets much more easily met. As a result, we tend to end up with a small amount of cutting edge kit, rather than a larger amount of really good kit. That philosophy was always one that people challenged, but until now… Read more »
Just feels like there is an inherent problem with how they budget for projects. Occasional overruns for large projects are expected and you have contingency funds for that but it seems every project goes over and also over the contingency.
They expect projects to fail to come in to budget. MOD pitch the pricing at a confidence level of 50%. So there is only a 50% expectation that the budgetted cost will be met. Then there’s the awesome practice of “realism”. They expect a certain percentage of projects to fail completely or be cancelled. So they double spend the money. It’s a bit like airlines overselling tickets in the expectation that a certain percentage of people won’t show. Now you might think that double spending the same money on two projects would lead to black holes, but it’s subtracted and… Read more »
That’s interesting. You would think they could build that into the budget, such as have core projects that were in the highly likely to deliver phase and then backup list for where budget allows. They have multiple decades of data to allow them to create a model that works. Constantly creating a budget that can’t succeed is silly as it hits voter confidence both in the goverment but also in the military. I doubt it will be a major factor but I would gamble that it is part of the reason people decide not to sign up. Constant negative news… Read more »
Interesting. I have never heard this analysis before. Is it your own impression is does it come from someone senior ‘in the system’?
I worked at DE&S. I would wager that very few projects go over budget as they are mostly firm price contracts. Those that are not and do go over original budgets attract the headlines. My project was on budget, on time and performance and quality were ‘spot on’ – no headlines!
Budgeting for defence projects, especially cutting edge ones, especially those which will run over 10 or more years, is incredibly difficult. Many are incomparable to most procurement projects in civvy street.
They are but the MOD has the data and experience to know be able to predict with reasonable certainty how overruns will appear and by how much to add this into the budget process.
I get it’s partially political to force the treasury hands but I’m not sure it actually works out well for the MOD most of the time and cuts happen.
Cutting edge projects (like Tempest) don’t have historic data to help the budget setting.
Even with less futuristic projects, there can be issues. With the carriers, not only were they radically different to those that went before but we had lost carrier building expertise. No wonder the original budget predictions were so far out.
They don’t but each generation of gear is cutting edge for it’s time and so with enough data you can create models.
The new french EPR nuclear power station was 4 x over budget and 12 years late. Also it shut itself down after one day of operation . This must be the top failure . Unfortunately this is the same type as two reactors being built at Hinkley point c
!
BOOM!
The Ministers (of Procurement, of Defence, Prime Minister) want cutting edge kit built by British workers in British factories, especially if they are located in marginal constituencies or deprived regions. Ajax…Wales??
You mean unlike Cheiftain, 432, Warrior, Harrier, HMS Dreadnought (the one from the 50’s)… yeah that only started happening in the 2000’s lol
Steve, This is the way you deal with an equipment black hole of, say, £17bn. You either tell the three armed services that they can not now have £17bn of new equipment or you ask the Treasury for another £17bn. Simples!
That £17 Billion was over 10 years.
That’s £1.7 Billion per year.
Labour gave £9 Billion in public sector pay rises.
The Tories cut £20 Billion in NI.
The British state spends £1.2 Trillion per year.
The deficit is a fraction of the treasuries’ margin of error each year.
Tell Rachel Reeves that the Defence equipment black hole of £17Bn over 10 years or the national black hole of £22Bn for this year is trivial!
She doesn’t seem to think so. She wants to close each and every black hole, seemingly, whether it is relatively large or small.
Point is the £17Bn defence black hole needs to be solved…somehow. The Forces need this kit and it is not funded.
Exactly. Defence numbers have been gradually cut to a level that 2/2.5% of GDP should pay for without recurring crises.
The big problem is keeping a lid on the ever growing costs of welfare and health.
Though ” black holes” are a popular theme, there really isn’t one in the 10 year equipment budget. The swing from an apparent surplus in 2022 to the reported £17b shortfall in 2023 arises for 2 reasons
1. Acceleration of nuclear costs into the 10 year period + £38b
2. RN including for the first time £16.4b costs of potential projects not yet designed or authorized- T32,T83. MROS,MRSS, FAD.
If Labour cut defence projects, it is because they choose to, not because they have to.
FAD? 🤔
A death of a thousand cuts! Will take a long expensive time to recover.
How is this happening? Inviting in millions of “new Britons” is supposed to make the economy grow.
Destroy the UK’s armed forces until we have no choice but join the EU’s military.
The EU does not have a military under command of their Parliament in Brussels. Plus…we are not in the EU!
1) Yet
2) I know
This week the armed forces minister achieved consensus on the “majority” of an agreement for the UK to join a military project under the EU’s defense coordination project group. Known as permanent cooperation structure (P.E.S.C.O). Starmer is a keen euro man !
Yes. He wants to be a good European. That’s why he is visiting France, Germany, Ireland….
Our involvement in PESCO does not signify loss of sovereignty nor is it a mark of desperation at defence under-funding.
It makes sense to collaborate with neighbours. We have an interest in having a secure Continent.
Just read on TWZ the Dutch are getting back into the tank game probably with Leo2A8! Yet we somehow can’t afford a few more CR3 and have to be prepared for cuts! Pathetic🤬
It’s not counter intuitive to be cutting defence.It’s stupidity. It’s a prime indicator of the government’s incompetence.
Well we are spending over £5.5 billion a year on illegal migrant accommodation. Now there’s some cash to fund the military if only we had a givernment that looked after citizens before illegal migrants
Well, you don’t want them living rough on the streets — that would cause even more social problems.
But it might discourage those attracted to UK from boat trips.
Lift any rock and you will find a politician. It is embarrassing tat there is a war in Europe and Successive UK governments vacillate and make excuses for doing nothing. Perhaps they think there will always be ‘peace in our time’. What Ukraine has shown us is that it is perceived weakness and lack of credible deterrents that promote war. It is clear that as usual our political class has lied to us to get in and now they intend to ignore the voters until they have to USE them again in five years. Labour said defence is a government’s… Read more »
for all the ex sailors on here, I was in Gibraltar yesterday and met the legendary Charles truck who ran the navy most well known pub the hole inthe the wall. it said that if you never had a wet in there that yod not been in the navy.every sailor for a central will have been in the place he sends his love to the fleet (like he always did). he was as gay as the night is dark and regularly in full drag he bemoaned the fact that gib was dying due to Britain not putting ships into the… Read more »
Labour has only been in power for weeks, it is a bit early to be slamming them on defence! We need to see what Lord Robertson’s team come up with first and how the Chancellor responds. For all the criticism of Labour on defence, it is worth remembering that Blair maintained defence spending at 2.5% of GDP and Brown left it at 2.5% 13 years later. The damage since under the Conservatives has been considerable, we are now only spending 2.07% of GDP, which includes all the dubious extra bits (£2.8+ bn pa) hat Osborne crammed into the defence budget.… Read more »