The Sunday Times - Britain
May 29, 2005
MoD blamed as forces face £18bn cutback
Michael Smith and Peter Almond
"THE armed forces are facing £18 billion of cuts or delays to “essential” ships, aircraft, armoured vehicles and equipment over the next decade because the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has overspent its budget.
This weekend Lord Boyce, the former chief of the defence staff, joined opposition parties in condemning the government as “irresponsible” for failing to fund the programmes.
Many were promoted by the government as high-technology systems that would more than compensate for the scrapping of equipment and units that it announced last year.
New figures have shown that the MoD is forecasting a procurement budget of £66 billion for the next 10 years compared with projected spending of £84 billion.
The Treasury has refused to provide any more money, leaving the forces no choice but to accept stringent cuts or delays to many of their most cherished programmes.
Last July Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, announced that 20,000 personnel would be cut from the forces along with 14 Royal Navy ships, the RAF’s fleet of Jaguar bombers, four infantry battalions and 80 Challenger 2 tanks.
Whitehall sources have now disclosed that a new round of cuts is looming with spending on 15 key projects, which were expected to cost a total of at least £40 billion over the next decade, having to be cut to £22 billion.
The plans for future equipment likely to be affected include the navy’s two new aircraft carriers and the air force’s Joint Strike Fighters (JSF), both of which are considered by military top brass to be essential to the armed forces’ doctrine of expeditionary warfare — sending troops to trouble spots around the world.
The carriers are expected to be reduced in size and their current delivery dates of 2012 will be pushed back, while the number of JSFs could be cut from the planned figure of 150 aircraft to as few as 100.
The army will have to delay plans for a new generation of light tanks and armoured personnel carriers designed to make it more mobile and reduce the time it takes to deploy large numbers of troops.
John Reid, the defence secretary, is said to be furious at the extent of the financial problems left behind by Hoon, who should have signed off this year’s equipment plan in the spring but held it over until after the election.
Hoon, now leader of the Commons, repeatedly claimed the forces were enjoying their longest sustained period of increased defence spending, while at the same time imposing big cuts to capabilities.
Boyce, who had to announce the highly controversial decision to scrap the navy’s 24 Harriers in 2002, said the decision to axe a total of six frigates and destroyers and then renege on the new system was “totally dishonest”."
end
Where it will end for the Royal Navy I dont know. But look for the threat of these possible cuts to the force structure: Another five surface combatants cut for a 20 ship level and the submarine force cut to six. And for only one CVS to be operational at a time vice two. The logistic force cuts moved up. Plus 5000 sailors cut.
I hope not but I dont see any other choice.
Its a weird coincidence that this would bring them close to the French MN major unit force levels.
Another strange coincidence is the latest major NATO exercise where the UK only sent one ship and the French five. As the French become more involved the UK seems to be slowly,painfully withdrawing.
May 29, 2005
MoD blamed as forces face £18bn cutback
Michael Smith and Peter Almond
"THE armed forces are facing £18 billion of cuts or delays to “essential” ships, aircraft, armoured vehicles and equipment over the next decade because the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has overspent its budget.
This weekend Lord Boyce, the former chief of the defence staff, joined opposition parties in condemning the government as “irresponsible” for failing to fund the programmes.
Many were promoted by the government as high-technology systems that would more than compensate for the scrapping of equipment and units that it announced last year.
New figures have shown that the MoD is forecasting a procurement budget of £66 billion for the next 10 years compared with projected spending of £84 billion.
The Treasury has refused to provide any more money, leaving the forces no choice but to accept stringent cuts or delays to many of their most cherished programmes.
Last July Geoff Hoon, then defence secretary, announced that 20,000 personnel would be cut from the forces along with 14 Royal Navy ships, the RAF’s fleet of Jaguar bombers, four infantry battalions and 80 Challenger 2 tanks.
Whitehall sources have now disclosed that a new round of cuts is looming with spending on 15 key projects, which were expected to cost a total of at least £40 billion over the next decade, having to be cut to £22 billion.
The plans for future equipment likely to be affected include the navy’s two new aircraft carriers and the air force’s Joint Strike Fighters (JSF), both of which are considered by military top brass to be essential to the armed forces’ doctrine of expeditionary warfare — sending troops to trouble spots around the world.
The carriers are expected to be reduced in size and their current delivery dates of 2012 will be pushed back, while the number of JSFs could be cut from the planned figure of 150 aircraft to as few as 100.
The army will have to delay plans for a new generation of light tanks and armoured personnel carriers designed to make it more mobile and reduce the time it takes to deploy large numbers of troops.
John Reid, the defence secretary, is said to be furious at the extent of the financial problems left behind by Hoon, who should have signed off this year’s equipment plan in the spring but held it over until after the election.
Hoon, now leader of the Commons, repeatedly claimed the forces were enjoying their longest sustained period of increased defence spending, while at the same time imposing big cuts to capabilities.
Boyce, who had to announce the highly controversial decision to scrap the navy’s 24 Harriers in 2002, said the decision to axe a total of six frigates and destroyers and then renege on the new system was “totally dishonest”."
end
Where it will end for the Royal Navy I dont know. But look for the threat of these possible cuts to the force structure: Another five surface combatants cut for a 20 ship level and the submarine force cut to six. And for only one CVS to be operational at a time vice two. The logistic force cuts moved up. Plus 5000 sailors cut.
I hope not but I dont see any other choice.
Its a weird coincidence that this would bring them close to the French MN major unit force levels.
Another strange coincidence is the latest major NATO exercise where the UK only sent one ship and the French five. As the French become more involved the UK seems to be slowly,painfully withdrawing.
Comment