Tuesday, 19 June 2012


I'm not one of those who thinks that military personnel are above reproach, but I do think that if our government sends them off to do America's their bidding, they have a duty to treat them decently.
So the next time that you hear Hammond or Cameron, or any of the rest of the hypocrites that make up the London government, lecture about how wonderful 'our brave boys' are, how they are heroes we should be proud of, the men who put the Great in Britain [someone needs to explain the origins of that name to them one day] then, remind yourself of this little carry on. 

Not that it is the first case of this kind. Troops have always been treated like dung, until they are needed... and they are frequently needed by the government in the none too subtle game of 'hiding behind the khaki'. 

The Telegraph article, to which I linked above, tells the whole story, but for those who prefer a shorter version, suffice it to say that the little pipsqueak of a Defence Secretary, Hammond, has overseen the paying off of troops who are within a very short time (in one case just 3 days) of qualifying for pension payments. 

One 40-year-old sergeant serving in the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers was only three days away from serving 22 years and qualifying for an immediate pension pot worth £108,000. He will now have to wait until he is 65 to receive the pension.

OK, they are generous pension situations, but whether or not you agree that they are warranted, given the extreme dangers involved in some of these guys' jobs [there are a fair few who will not collect any pension at all], these were the terms the guys signed up for. And Hammond has ridden roughshod over their contracts. The Military Covenant, my butt!
It takes a special kind of SPIV to do that, [whilst making no attempt to do anything about ministerial or parliamentary pensions, which are even more generous] and then call upon the citizenry to show more respect for them... Fortunately, or unfortunately, Hammond is that kind of SPIV.

But even worse...these morons at the MoD, seem not to learn from their mistakes. 

Not two months ago, 'Private Eye' reported that the MoD had sacked around 3,000 of its admin staff in order to save money, but had unfortunately neglected to undertake a skills needs analysis before they let them go (with redundancy payments). 

Unfortunately for the taxpayer, but luckily for the individuals, the MoD had decided, on what passes for mature reflection in London, to re-employ at least half of them, with no hope of clawing back the redundancy money! Duh!

Now The Telegraph goes on to report on the serving men's situation...

“The decision is not being made on the grounds of ability, experience or commitment, purely on cost. [Ring any bells?] It would appear that capable, experienced and dedicated officers are being sacrificed. 
"His [a redundant officer's father] suspicions were further raised after 38 out of 50 of his son’s Sandhurst 1999 intake have been sacked. In the most recent round of redundancies announced last week the Army lost 300 officers in total, who are seen as they most combat experienced for generations."
So, don't despair men; you may get a creepy phone call in a few weeks asking if erm... you'd like to erm... come back... bit of a cock up, doncha know, old chap...
And yet, can you believe, they have a billion pounds to spend on the first steps of updating a weapon [which will eventually cost many many billions] that we don't need and won't/can't use, but which will guarantee British prime ministers a seat at the top table for the next 20 years. 
Quad Erat Demonstrandum.


  1. It seems that the spivs have been in charge of the lunatic asylum that is the English Government (it’s OK to refer to it as such, as the good Lord Leveson did at his inquiry, and if it’s good enough for him it’s good enough for me) since 1979 when the manic Spiv-in-Chief got her hands on the levers of power. Since then we have had a succession of them in both blue and pink hues. It seems to involve either privatisation or part privatisation to other friendly spivs who will deliver the quid pro quo later on when the public have got totally sick of them and stopped voting for them. But what a choice the pink spivs or the blue spivs, now joined by the yellow spivs as a wholly owned adjunct to the blue spivs (at the moment)!

    The sooner Scotland gets off that Spiv-a-go-round the better! Then we might have a chance at a competent government that does what it says (or tries to) with none of the attachments of pointless wars and nuclear weapons to keep the leader of a different country at the world top table. And none of the moronic agenda led crusades that lurch the whole nation from left to right in (if you will excuse the mixed metaphor) ever decreasing circles as the gap between the pink and blues gets ever smaller!

  2. Spivving comment Munguin.

    I can't disagree with anything you said there.

    We have to persuade Scots to listen to the real arguments so that we can strike out on our own and bin this appalling society we have become a part of.

  3. I'm sure I saw an advert on TV for Royal Marines the other night. Are they looking for what they would regard as cheaper cannon fodder?

  4. Aye John, the recruitment team was out in Dundee the other day in preparation for our share of the Olympics... half an hour with THE TORCH ('scuse me while I sit down and get my emotions under control). This must be like private industry when they sack people and then take others on on a totally new contract at half the money and with no pension rights.

    [Incidentally, talking of the torch, despite what they said about the success of the torch in Dundee, it was a rainy day; they expected a crowd of at least 3,000 and had catered for 5,000. Fewer that 2,000 actually turned up, but left the most almighty mess... enough for at least 10,000, as they discarded the freebies that the sponsors had put in bags for them.]

  5. tris

    They are Etonians (OE) as becky cams mate like to say and have no more concern for the common soldier etc that they would a worn out nag..well even less..err! much less


    all that about the Olympic torch is just well petty and i didn't have you down as petty.....

    No one is going to vote for or against seperation on the basis of a torch or the Queen waving from Buck palace balcony.......
    Umm! are they????

  6. Niko:

    It wasn't petty.

    The Olympics are happening 600 miles away. For most of us getting to them, even if you could get a ticket, is outside the bounds of possibility. Hotels have put prices up to astronomical levels (not that they weren't already twice that of Paris or Edinburgh).

    All the money (our money) that was spent was spent there; all the contracts went, quite rightly, to local firms. Scotland got nothing. Neither for that matter did Cornwall, Wales, Ireland or the North of England. However, to make us believe that we are all in this together, we are supposed to get wildly excited when we can't get home from work because the roads have been closed to allow this torch (which doesn't have an Olympic history but was dreamt up by Hitler's head of Propaganda for the 1936 games, because it symbolised everything that was Arian) to make its progress up and down the country. Because Lord Sir Sebastian Coe, MBE, OBE, CBE wants us to feel that we are all in it together. A big society sort of thing.

    As it happens the SNP is very much FOR the games and the Sports Minister has praised the few matches that Glasgow is hosting for London with enthusiasm.

    However, SNP or no SNP, the thing has been hyped to high doh and I laughed my socks off when they were talking about it in Edinburgh. The BBC had some woman up on the castle ramparts telling us how there were throngs of people... and the backdrop was of half empty seats.

    It has been used as propaganda. (Goebbels knew a thing or two. )No doubt about it. The jubilee and the Olympics, union jack waving... and it has affected public perception. But they can't keep that up for two years...although I imagine that they will arrange for Harry to get married and Katie to have a baby, to persuade us of our great joy...And it's not just about Scotland and independence. They want the majority of the people in the UK...in places where there is no independence debate to forget how much they are having to go without.

    Not petty, Niko...just practical.

    But you're right about Cameron, although he gets his horses from News International.

  7. Ha ha ha ha ha CH ... Silly old trout.

    Does she ever get anything right?

    I reckon they should ditch her. She's a walking disaster for Labour.