Showing posts with label Armed Forces. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Armed Forces. Show all posts

Sunday, 27 January 2013

SNAPS ON SUNDAY (ON SUNDAY THIS WEEK!)

You bet he was radical
The No Campaign criticised the Yes Campaign's tartan for its colour. grey they said was the colour of the future of an independent Scotland. How sad to have so little faith in your own people.
Or you could always believe what Ruth Davidson says; that is not what she used to say, but what she is saying now
A dismal group...who's the big tall one at the end (or is he standing on a box)? The only other alternative is that he is so full of hot air that he's floating away
Didn't Sarwar say that there weren't any Labour members in Labour Voters for independence. What about this fellow then?
Exactly. We'll be able to feed the kids that go to bed with empty stomachs and help old folk keep the fire on in the winter.
As usual, guess who gets the bum deal?
Et puis, pour les francophones:
Palais de Elysée is where the French President lives: Théâtre de Guignol is a clown theatre. So they  either have pretty thick town planning staff in Paris, or ones with a cheeky sense of humour.  This sign was put up when the odious Sarkozy was president!

CLICK ON PICS FOR A BIGGER IMAGE

Tuesday, 11 October 2011

WHO'S GOT A RECRUITMENT CONSULTANCY?

You'll have heard that the UK government is sacking thousands of troops, ditching aircraft carriers, planes, sharing equipment with the traditional enemy of the English, the French, and all because we are too broke to pay for armed forces, yeah?


Well, how's this for an idea? Suppose we were to hire a civilian recruitment company to recruit military personnel at the rate of 7,500 a year, over the next ten years, and pay them, wait for it ............... £1 billion?


What do you think?


Over the next 3 years the UK will get rid of 12,000 personnel, and a further 8,000 will go in the year 2020. So why would there be a need to do much in the way of recruiting you might ask. Surely it would be better to hang on to the ones you already have?


The government clearly thinks not, and who are we to argue?


Now there are a few pitfalls. For example, they tried to use civilians before and it didn't work. And most officers would agree with Richard Kemp, a past commander of troops in Afghanistan, that the best recruiting officer is a man who has served.


However, this government thinks that the new scheme will cut down on wastage whereby 17,000 troops a year go through training but only around 9,000 pass out. 
The MoD also thinks that it will save them money, and of course it will release troops who are currently involved in recruitment, for front-line duties. They somewhat spoil that argument by saying that troops WILL still play the major role in recruitment. In other words we are paying out a billion for the company to play a minor role. 


Expensive minor role, don't you think.


I suggest that Air Commodore Andrew Lambert, UK National Defence Association, may be a little closer to the truth when he suggests that the company could recruit the redundant personnel at a reduced rate to do their old jobs. That's maybe what the MoD means by "saving money". 


I wonder which one of the cabinet ministers' "young friends" is a consultant in a recruitment company...


Any takers?
*******************************************************************************
PS: Bad luck in Spain, Scotland. Well, more like outplayed. But I was still surprised to see that the Daily Telegraph sports section leads with Ireland's win over Armenia. Scotland's match is very much an also ran.