The Labour Government

[Churchlawtonblue]

Its percentage of government spending per department, not of GDP.

How else would they spend the money? Apologies for my ignorance but I don't see the difference ?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Defence is a mess, literally. People preaching for political gain don’t understand the situation on the ground and will argue anything other than the truth.

Let’s face it, we, as a country, are in shit state and it seems nobody wants to fund it for the future good of our people. You only have to look on here for that. Fuck, some are even leaving the country after they’ve made their money from it.

Pitiful.

We can get away without having aircraft carriers without any aircraft. It's time to accept that we aren't a great power anymore.

 

[metalblue]

It's been a rise in pensions of £36 a week over the last two years so (cynically maybe) withdrawing £6 a week now should have been less outrageous than against a £9 a week rise next year.

If we accept that UK pensions are low compared to most other European countries, the triple lock has improved that position. And the "relative" figure that isn't being mentioned is that the number of pensioners keeps getting higher relative to the number of people paying tax to fund their pensions.

An aging population is a huge problem. I fully expect state pension to be means tests at some point but it’ll be a brave party that brings it in given we have this relationship to NI.

The timing and/or cut off point are the main issues. We know a pensioner or two is going to die this winter and you know the headlines already even if they would have died anyway. The past couple of years have been expensive for us all but ultimately the rise next year is decent and would allay a lot of the concern for the million living above pension credits but on under £259 a week.

They’ve raised taxes by £40bn and are scrabbling around the back of the preverbal sofa for a quid. Anyroad choices have been made and they’re going to front it out.

 

[meltonblue]

17m a year saving per ship against the loss of that potential capability. Whoopee doo. Just for context this year the UK spent 15m a day on Assylum seekers.

I didn’t post that to justify the decision, I was just saying the money saved isn’t being cut from the budget. All the service chiefs agreed with the decision so clearly they believe the money is better spent elsewhere.

 

[hilts]

Only if people don’t hold them to account against it. Starmer has made a cast iron commitment to increasing spending to 2.5% and the strategic review underway is to say the roadmap on how to get there.

If it doesn’t or if he doesn’t deliver the roadmap, then he will fail in that commitment, it’s not that he hasn’t made one.

That's a very naive way at looking at something, these are politicians they spend most of their lives promising things they don't deliver on. Can't believe people still judge on what they say they will do rather than what they have done.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Old rates, reviewed and changed in-line with minimum wage.

So it's minimum wage? Ok no problem so £500 a year more, I think my case still stands?

Does anyone on here think that paying new Navy recruits the minimum wage is appropriate? Given the commitment and responsibility they have ? I think we all know the answer to this question.

 

[meltonblue]

How else would they spend the money? Apologies for my ignorance but I don't see the difference ?

I’m not sure I get your question, how else would they spend what money? I was responding to someone asking where all the collective tax income was spent, the chart I posted gives government expenditure broken down per sector to show where it’s being spent.

 

[metalblue]

The statement said the savings were being retained in full in the defence budget, so it’s there for reinvestment. Thats why I was asking when the strategic review was planned to be completed.

Fair enough if that’s what they’ve said mate

 

[meltonblue]

That's a very naive way at looking at something, these are politicians they spend most of their lives promising things they don't deliver on. Can't believe people still judge on what they say they will do rather than what they have done.

Which is exactly what I said?

 

[metalblue]

Which is why I said they were doing the strategic review, that’s to give the roadmap to get to the 2.5%. Collectively it’s not word soup at all.

I’ll believe when I read it. Really hope to be proven wrong because increase in defence spending was something I wanted to see in the main parties manifesto’s

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I’m not sure I get your question, how else would they spend what money? I was responding to someone asking where all the collective tax income was spent, the chart I posted gives government expenditure broken down per sector to show where it’s being spent.

How you get a difference of between 2 and 6% on the defence spending proportion? Using the same total expenditure?

 

[meltonblue]

I’ll believe when I read it. Really hope to be proven wrong because increase in defence spending was something I wanted to see in the main parties manifesto’s

I agree too, im just saying what they’ve said and like I also said, if they don’t do it then they should be held to account.

This is what they committed to -

“Prime Minister Keir Starmer has underlined the UK’s cast iron commitment to spending 2.5% of GDP on defence to respond to growing threats…..

The review will determine the future defence posture of the UK, the capabilities needed and will set out a roadmap to achieving 2.5% of GDP on defence.”

Thats their own statement so that’s exactly what I’m expecting to see.

 

[metalblue]

We can get away without having aircraft carriers without any aircraft. It's time to accept that we aren't a great power anymore.

We do have aircraft. Not enough yet but they are on order.

 

[hilts]

Which is exactly what I said?

No you said he made a cast iron commitment, politicians don't make cast iron commitments, there is always a black hole or change in circumstances to pull out of a hat.

It's the well worn promise something, get approval, wait for it to be yesterday's news and promise summat else but have excuses ready for the odd journo who may bring it up.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

We can get away without having aircraft carriers without any aircraft. It's time to accept that we aren't a great power anymore.

Get away with? What exactly does that mean?

It's not about being a great power, it's about the UK looking at a new world order with Trump pulling the strings and withdrawing US military support and a rising aggressive Russia on our doorstep.

 

[meltonblue]

How you get a difference of between 2 and 6% on the defence spending proportion? Using the same total expenditure?

You’ve lost me mate. GDP is completely different to government expenditure, that’s the total value of the goods and services of a country, the second is just how governments spend their budget.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

We do have aircraft. Not enough yet but they are on order.

Do you know how many we have for each carrier? and what is there normal operational capacity. I believe both are currently way short.

We have had both carriers for several years now, how long does it take to order F35s? Does it really take 4 or 5 years?

Do the Chinese and Yanks build carriers and then put them to sea with 25% or 30% of the planes they are designed to carry.

Sounds to me as if those in charge couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery?

 

[meltonblue]

No you said he made a cast iron commitment, politicians don't make cast iron commitments, there is always a black hole or change in circumstances to pull out of a hat.

It's the well worn promise something, get approval, wait for it to be yesterday's news and promise summat else but have excuses ready for the odd journo who may bring it up.

Yes they do, they make cast iron commitments all the time, what you’re saying is they don’t subsequently fulfil them or change the goalposts, which I agree with and why I said he needs to be held to account for if/when he fails against it.

He has said that he is committed to 2.5 % government spending on defence. I’m not giving him credit for anything on that aside from noting that he’s said he’s committed to it and also said the strategic review will deliver the roadmap on how they’re going to get there.

If they don’t get there by either the time they say they will in the roadmap or by the time he leaves office, then he will have failed in that commitment and I’ll hold him to account for it.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

17m a year saving per ship against the loss of that potential capability. Whoopee doo. Just for context this year the UK spent 15m a day on Assylum seekers.

The ships are fucked and only used on paper to appease our NATO allies.

Glad to see us being truthful, at last. May go some way to sorting our Defence.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

We can get away without having aircraft carriers without any aircraft. It's time to accept that we aren't a great power anymore.

No, we are not.