Well, whoever would have thought it of the British Civil Service? Apparently, due to poor financial management the Ministry of Defence faces a crisis.
A “black hole” of some £80 billion no less, has been discovered. And the MoD’s answer is to pay off between 300 and 500 troops despite us being at war.
No, I swear to you, this is not April 1. According to The Times: “Despite the conflict in Afghanistan, the Armed Forces are preparing for swingeing cuts to procurement programmes and personnel under a strategic defence review, after the election".
WHAT?
As I understand it we have troops out there in Afghanistan, badly equipped from a lack of massively expensive kit like helicopters and tanks, down to the lack of bullets and boots, and the fact that their rations are pitiful. They also spend far too long at the front, return far too often, and are suffering incredible stress. Stress which is exacerbated by the conditions their families live in back home (well not senior people obviously. This IS Britain), and with all that (and more) going on they are going to pay off between 300 and 500.
Nope. You really couldn’t make that up, so it must be true.
The Army responds by saying that it is closer to full strength than it has been for years, (possibly due to healthy recruitment became of the recession and the DWP bullying unemployed lads), but that seems to me to miss the point that the full strength is not enough when you have a war going on, and when so many of your numbers are not able to fight due to war induced injury and
illness.
According to the Public Accounts Committee matters have worsened to the point where the MoD will have to take difficult decisions, such as to cancel whole equipment programmes. So our troops will be even worse equipped, if that’s possible.
OK Brown, or indeed Cameron, or possibly even Clegg, if he holds the balance of power: this is the message from Munguin’s Republic, but I’ll bet it is echoed by people all over the country.
If we can’t afford to be involved in stuff like this, then withdraw, or at least draw down our commitment to the level that we can afford. Start looking very carefully at what can be cut.
But look at the top, the frills, the ...........Do senior officers need mansions or drivers? Must they have massive expense accounts? Need there be so many (I heard there were more Admirals at the MoD than there are ships in the British Navy)? Why so many staff in the MoD, especially when they seem to have mismanaged the organisation into bankruptcy?
Start cutting from the top. Whatever you do, do not, at any price, cut from the bottom. Britain is a small, and thanks to Labour’s recession, very poor country. There’s a limit to what we will stand being done to our troops so that you ministers can continue to sit at President Obama’s right hand, where you most certainly do not belong!
Pictured: The Ministry of Defence Building in London and the tri-service badge which I reproduce here with acknowledgement to the British Crown Copyright (as I am instructed to do).
.............................
A “black hole” of some £80 billion no less, has been discovered. And the MoD’s answer is to pay off between 300 and 500 troops despite us being at war.
No, I swear to you, this is not April 1. According to The Times: “Despite the conflict in Afghanistan, the Armed Forces are preparing for swingeing cuts to procurement programmes and personnel under a strategic defence review, after the election".
WHAT?
As I understand it we have troops out there in Afghanistan, badly equipped from a lack of massively expensive kit like helicopters and tanks, down to the lack of bullets and boots, and the fact that their rations are pitiful. They also spend far too long at the front, return far too often, and are suffering incredible stress. Stress which is exacerbated by the conditions their families live in back home (well not senior people obviously. This IS Britain), and with all that (and more) going on they are going to pay off between 300 and 500.
Nope. You really couldn’t make that up, so it must be true.
The Army responds by saying that it is closer to full strength than it has been for years, (possibly due to healthy recruitment became of the recession and the DWP bullying unemployed lads), but that seems to me to miss the point that the full strength is not enough when you have a war going on, and when so many of your numbers are not able to fight due to war induced injury and
illness.According to the Public Accounts Committee matters have worsened to the point where the MoD will have to take difficult decisions, such as to cancel whole equipment programmes. So our troops will be even worse equipped, if that’s possible.
OK Brown, or indeed Cameron, or possibly even Clegg, if he holds the balance of power: this is the message from Munguin’s Republic, but I’ll bet it is echoed by people all over the country.
If we can’t afford to be involved in stuff like this, then withdraw, or at least draw down our commitment to the level that we can afford. Start looking very carefully at what can be cut.
But look at the top, the frills, the ...........Do senior officers need mansions or drivers? Must they have massive expense accounts? Need there be so many (I heard there were more Admirals at the MoD than there are ships in the British Navy)? Why so many staff in the MoD, especially when they seem to have mismanaged the organisation into bankruptcy?
Start cutting from the top. Whatever you do, do not, at any price, cut from the bottom. Britain is a small, and thanks to Labour’s recession, very poor country. There’s a limit to what we will stand being done to our troops so that you ministers can continue to sit at President Obama’s right hand, where you most certainly do not belong!
Pictured: The Ministry of Defence Building in London and the tri-service badge which I reproduce here with acknowledgement to the British Crown Copyright (as I am instructed to do).
.............................
