Defence cuts

[rikoshea]

Peter my sentiments exactly do we need that many idoits running the country.

[stu reed]

As i'm re-enlisting...ive had a word with the recruiting office...looks like the following cuts will only be for the following....1. Artillery (reduce the number of Regiments) in reality..do we need a huge Artillery bombardment anymore?. 2. Tanks ( mothball a whole load of Challenger 2 MBT). 3. Pullout of Germany ( the Russians arent going to be coming over the hill anymore/ and Afghanistan completley by 2015.............

[McGUYVER]

Jase
Their not paying you,so there's a saving.

[keithwill38]

Stu that may well be the case,but what happens after Afghanistan and the Germany pullout,an army consisting of a couple of Regiments to parade on horseguards and outside Buck house,and another couple to jump out of the 3 or 4 aeroplanes the RAF will have left,as for the Navy, well we can always rely on the French(when it suits them),but sarcasm aside come 2015/16 i can see there being lethal cuts in Army manpower.

[Gerrycc943]

God help us if the unions start playing up again - back to the 70's!

Additionally, let's hope the troubles in Northern Ireland don't kick off again. We're pretty depleted as it is and that includes our reserve forces!

[TRAV 24]

When does it stop being an Army and become a Defence Force,how many cutbacks do we have before the figures are so low we no longer have an Army?

[Paul Hinge]

Sam
There are proposed cuts in Parliament to reduce the number of MP's by about 70ish. This was part of the demands of the coalition agreement alongside that for a change in the voting system to PR. However, I have it on good authority that a fair number of Tory's and all of Labour will try and filibuster this in Parliament and if they lose that go for a judicial review either way it seems that the old guard, “Don't want change Deidre.” This is because they will lose their grip on the rotten constituencies both have created over the decades to suit their electoral purpose…..representation doesn’t come into their equation!

Hingey

[peterlansley]

Fine but why are we still making Lords out of old MPs.

[Gwyn Nicholas]

Fine but why are we still making Lords out of old MPs.

If you have business where family are employed as well as others and cuts have to be made, the others will probably be the first to go. Politicians are the same, they look out for each other. Yet another sector who agree that cuts have to be made to get us out of a hole as long as it does not affect them.

It is a fact and perhaps a human failing that people do not like change, pure and simple. You see it in everyday life and I certainly witnessed it many times during my service. What I also remember is, although we all dislike change there were those who quickly accepted that change was inevitable and just got on with it with the minimum of fuss. Those people (in my opinion) were leaders. In the present climate I think all parties agree that drastic measures have to be taken to get this country out of the hole it is in. Blame is now pointless save making sure we dont make the same mistakes again.

To that end, this Government/Coalition is making decisions that they believe will get us out of this financial quagmire which is the problem at hand. We are not under threat of a major invasion from Sea, land or Air. The Warsaw pact has gone and the current threat is from terrorists. Shouldn't we concentrate on the current threat rather than fearing another War of historical magnitude. If we send our lads and lasses into conflict they must have the best of what they actually need and not a huge Echelon of equipment that is of little use.

The cuts are being made everywhere, like it or not they will happen. Will they work...only time will tell, but for now, we have people who are making decisions, who are accepting that things must change and are actually doing something about it painful as it may be.

[jungle1810]

Hello Hingey and Peter Lansley,
Hingey re the AVM (alternative voting method or system) If this system is accepted what right has any one to move my vote to another candidate? This looks like another old pal's act. Even allowing for the fact I will only put one cross on any voting paper and nobody BUT NOBODY can then move my vote. Who decides why people are to be disenfranchised. Peter Lansley hit the nail on the head with his thread. Why do we need some thing like 670 peers in a small country such as ours. Unless it is for the obvious fact of off-loading the sycophants that always kept to party lines regardless of the damage they done to the country.Gwyn Nichols 's thread was very true and pertinent. If people dig deep and look at the money that is wasted by the manifold of Quangos the position is grave to say the least. A good example albeit only one of many is the woman who is in charge of the voting system she works for two days a year at best and is paid many thousand 's of pounds for it.Another point to ponder on is why does the UK need more people to run the UK, than it takes to run the government of the U.S.of A.
RBD