Mid-term review for the Strategic review?

[Zealot]

Extra billion for defence has been quoted. Anyone got any details??

From what I gathered its a something like this

An extra £160m for counter-terrorism police
An extra £1bn for cyber-capabilities and the Trident successor programme
£10m for mental health care for veterans, to mark the centenary of World War One Armistice
£1.7m in Holocaust education programmes to mark the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, in northern Germany
£1m to fund school trips to World War one battlefields

[dmereifield]

Extra billion for defence has been quoted. Anyone got any details??

From what I gathered its a something like this

An extra £160m for counter-terrorism police
An extra £1bn for cyber-capabilities and the Trident successor programme
£10m for mental health care for veterans, to mark the centenary of World War One Armistice
£1.7m in Holocaust education programmes to mark the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, in northern Germany
£1m to fund school trips to World War one battlefields

So what of the extra ASW money?

[R686]

Extra billion for defence has been quoted. Anyone got any details??

£1m to fund school trips to World War one battlefields

That’s coming out of the defence budget?

[ArmChairCivvy]

OK, cyber and ASW.

Why do the newspapers keep adding in deterrent, which
- has its own budget
- and a plentiful contingency?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Before these drip-feed amounts, added to the defence budget in the course of this year, we were level with
https://www.statista.com/statistics/298 ... ingdom-uk/ 2011/12, which means that in the intervening years there was a cumulative shortfall of £ 10.4 bn... quite a lot of catch-up remains to be done

[abc123]

OK, cyber and ASW.

Why do the newspapers keep adding in deterrent, which
- has its own budget
- and a plentiful contingency?

Because they are against of it, so they are trying to make it look that if there's no UK deterrent- everything would be OK?

[abc123]

Before these drip-feed amounts, added to the defence budget in the course of this year, we were level with
https://www.statista.com/statistics/298 ... ingdom-uk/ 2011/12, which means that in the intervening years there was a cumulative shortfall of £ 10.4 bn... quite a lot of catch-up remains to be done

Inflation adjusted numbers?

Because if not, 25,7 bln. in 2000 is the same amount like 42,4 bln. in 2018- or 39,3 bln. in 2011 is like 48 bln. today. If we count defence inflation, even more...

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bil ... -1900.html

[ArmChairCivvy]

Committee's findings (among many):
"The National Security Capability Review was commissioned as a “quick refresh” of capabilities but nine months since it began—and with defence now being considered separately and over a longer timeframe—it is apparent that the NSCR has inadvertently become an uncomfortable ‘halfway house’ between a refresh and a full review."

and one of the responses [from the Gvmnt] is that the discussions had cannot be shared - even in confidence - as within the Cabinet they have been 'full & frank'

Published: 17 October 2018

[Lord Jim]

Pressure is mounting though for the Government to come clean and publish at least something. I still think it is a case of a square peg and a round hole, in that they cannot match the real needs of the Armed Forces, not their "Wish list", to the money the Treasury is willing to give the MoD. We talk about the Bow Wave of procurement programmes within the MoD, well if something isn't done it is going to turn into a tsunami that will seriously damage out Armed Forces.

[ArmChairCivvy]

NAO has come out re: the EP again and as there is not much project level detail, one can conclude from
"undertake the necessary analysis and make the decisions needed for the Plan to be affordable. In January 2018, it established MDP to take the action needed to close the affordability gap, but this work has not yet concluded. Given that 84% of the identified affordability challenge falls in the next four years, the Department must make decisions now."
- the "worst case" gap has gone up from £20bn "only" by the 10% = military inflation?
- the most likely outcome (=central forecast) has gone up by more
- by mid-20s the situation should be under control... if nothing changes in a fundamental way (does it ever?)
- but the cumulative funding gap until then needs "action"

The downwards adjustments to what the Commands were putting forth just for the year in the running now and after receiving a negotiated £ 1.2 bn extra from Treasury, again for in-year balancing, are summarised in the report's Figure 15, I will take an index approach, for ease of comparison)
- combat air 100... by changing timing (of not just kit, but also "accessories" to it?)
- army 200 (will have to look into that further as presumably some prgrms are being accelerated??)
and wait for it...
- joint command 700 (IT, interoperability, hardening of comms... all the invisible stuff)

[SW1]

AAC

Yep there not impressed

“The Department’s Equipment Plan remains unaffordable, with forecast costs exceeding budgets by £7.0 billion over the next 10 years. This variance could increase or decrease depending on different circumstances, with the Department estimating a worst-case scenario of costs increasing by £14.8 billion should all the identified risks materialise. However, some of its analysis remains optimistic and costs could increase further. The Department is improving its understanding of affordability risks, but we are not yet fully confident in the robustness of some of its underlying assumptions, particularly around efficiencies.”

https://www.nao.org.uk/report/the-equip ... =hootsuite

[ArmChairCivvy]

Those are the numbers they quote from "base" materials... and then they (NAO) proceed to produce bigger numbers

Anyway, as Ron has said many times, the new format is most unsatisfactory as the reader cannot make his/her own judgement about what it is actually based on (and what trade-offs the Commands have chosen to make).

A few cherries have been sprinkled on top of the rather flat cake:
- Protector shunted to the right by 2 years
- a couple of billion "rescued" by pushing the start of Astute Successor to the other side of the 10-yr horizon

Of course the EP is not the place for announcing new force structures. But the two (kit and the structure it is for) need to "gel".
- MDP is the "place" for the latter
- NAO says the MoD commitment as to when they will come out with that is so late that even the next EP will not (?) be able to reflect the changes
- Williamson seems to be quite good at dealing with auditors (keeping them busy with detail; while denying them - and us - of the assumptions that detail should be judged against)
- so we get to hear about efficiency, but effectiveness (of both the proc process, and what it delivers) is anybody's guess. And the £200 bn total will be breached soon! I hope the Joint Committee gets things shared in confidence? As on this basis effective oversight is impossible.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Commentator @clinch asks (on a ships' thread) what will get cut, in the light of the most likely figure (£ 7bn) figure for the 10-yr shortfall baked into the EP as it stands.

The answer should be that objectively the Forces need the same kind of annual funding boost out to the mid-20s (half-way thru the plan) as has happened (after the fact - bad form!) this year, from the BBC today:
"An MoD spokesman said the department strived "to ensure our military have the very best ships, aircraft and vehicles through our £186bn plan"... plus the 7; in no time at all we will breach the £ 200 bn 'barrier'?

He added the Treasury has guaranteed an extra £1bn to boost the UK's defences in Chancellor Philip Hammond's most recent budget.

This is alongside an £800m increase given to the government department in the summer."

Now, it might be worthwhile to show 'willing' as the "spokesman" for Europe (in defence matters) might not be there, before long. 5 months ago he said

“Putin seeks to shatter NATO,” Mattis warned in a commencement address at the U.S. Naval War College in Newport, R.I. “He aims to diminish the appeal of the western democratic model and attempts to undermine America’s moral authority. His actions are designed not to challenge our arms at this point but to undercut and compromise our belief in our ideals.”

- be it the £10 bn or 20, the fact remains that
"[In June] the Commons Defence Committee said the UK needed to increase the defence budget [...] to maintain influence with Washington [-] and Nato allies."

[Lord Jim]

We all know the MoD needs more money, but until the treasury stops crapping itself all the time regarding BRAXIT and things settle down it will be a Band Aid culture across most Governmental departments, even the NHS.

[ArmChairCivvy]

This
"Theresa May is ‘too overloaded’ with Brexit to tackle the ‘burning injustices’ she promised to focus on as Prime Minister, Foreign Affairs Committee chair Tom Tugendhat said"
is not interesting.

What is interesting is that the previous to the current National Security Adviser (who, the current one, is a part timer, anyway) has said that exactly the same happened with NSC meetings... no time; another "burning issue" Brexit meeting instead.

[Lord Jim]

Basically Defence including whatever comes out of the MDP, and these will probably be only a list of aspirations, is in limbo until BREXIT and all its components are resolved and the Government can see what the state of the economy and piggy bank are. Only areas that will support an election campaign will get any proper attention beyond this until then.

[ArmChairCivvy]

list of aspirations, is in limbo until BREXIT and

Let's take stock:

Navy
- working up
- OK, exc. for
-- number of surface units (& manning)??
-- jets and ASW/ AEW helo numbers v tight... but getting there

RAF
-OK, but
-- will have to husband Typhoon fleet
-- while getting it 'up to scratch' with: AESA, Meteor, Spear 3
- and getting the 'nxt-gen' other than for the carriers going

Army??
-FIX =Strike
-STRIKE; can Strike 'strike'?... or will they have to wait, for the 'other guys'?
-EXPLOIT... if 'strike' with only two AI Bdes works, then you do have the exploit there, with "your other 50%" of the force

What is missing? Deep and Precision Fires. GBAD. ISTAR we have invested a lot in... will it work in an intensive peer-to-peer combat scenario?.

More than plenty of mln $$ questions there
- luckily we have the second biggest defence budget in ... (within our circle of FRIENDS )!

[ArmChairCivvy]

More than plenty of mln $$ questions there

OK, let's rephrase in blns:

Brexit preparedness - for a deal or otherwise - might lead to several bn needing to be allocated straight away.
- worst (deal) outcome

What about "ending austerity" on the back of a good Brexit deal. The Resolution Foundation think-tank says an extra £31bn by 2022/23 would be needed.

Rather than going on about the unknowns - as what will unfold depends on general developments, a 'known' is that an extra £6.5bn a year in real terms will be needed to fund Mrs May's NHS commitment.
- that alone matches the £ 7 bn 'best-case Black Hole over 10 years' in defence proc & support (which together are less than half of the overall budget)
- no wonder that plaster was applied over the opening cracks until Brexit Day and a 'new MDP' will be running in parallel with the yearly ABC round (= allocating the headline budget
figure)
- put these numbers against what the Public Accounts Committee about the Future Force 2020 when that was announced: "a plan for a regular army of 82,000 offset by an increase in the reserve component in order to save £10.6bn". Now, the 7 bn most-likely short fall could be covered in many ways (= a combination of them all), but just to put the coming year in defence "on a Richter scale"

[ArmChairCivvy]

Sorry, a double posting; PC, connection or the forum's server playing up. Kremlins in there ?

[RetroSicotte]

I was going to delete the post for you, but forum gremlins being known as "kremlins" made me laugh too much to want to.

[ArmChairCivvy]

forum gremlins being known as "kremlins"

... no finger pointing at all

[ArmChairCivvy]

Reading through minutes from committee sessions in the Parliament, the radio silence on MDP is indirectly broken, snippets only, though:
- funding for 500 MIVs in place, but 1500 as the total toyed with (= a resulting force structure looking v different from today's)
- first operational Captor-E will be with Kuwait deliveries, but the radar actually comes in three different flavours and the RAF is still evaluating which one to go with (explanation for why it is taking a very lo..ong time; not only a money question)
- Tempest funding up for renewal (or not ) at the end of the running budget year. So the announcement with fanfare (of the two-year prgrm) was done when well past the half-way mark in time (= an invitation to other countries, to join in. Rather than us taking all the fixed cost 'on the nose' alone - effectively what happened with Typhoon's A2G capabilities)

[RetroSicotte]

Reading through minutes from committee sessions in the Parliament, the radio silence on MDP is indirectly broken, snippets only, though:
- funding for 500 MIVs in place, but 1500 as the total toyed with (= a resulting force structure looking v different from today's)
- first operational Captor-E will be with Kuwait deliveries, but the radar actually comes in three different flavours and the RAF is still evaluating which one to go with (explanation for why it is taking a very lo..ong time; not only a money question)
- Tempest funding up for renewal (or not ) at the end of the running budget year. So the announcement with fanfare (of the two-year prgrm) was done when well past the half-way mark in time (= an invitation to other countries, to join in. Rather than us taking all the fixed cost 'on the nose' alone - effectively what happened with Typhoon's A2G capabilities)

Good spots. Very interesting on hearing about Captor-E. I wonder what the differences is, doesn't sound like it's a directly "level of ability" tiering from the way thats said.

[Lord Jim]

If they realise the 1500 MIV option could that mean the end of the Warrior CIP along with the BASV programme with variants of the MIV replacing these and the platforms they were destined to replace?

[ArmChairCivvy]

Finally, they have come to their senses. Or am I jumping the gun, as we are only talking about a think-tank report "Fixing Military Strategy (and as it has not been done, there is the necessary postfix) post-Brexit

But the central ideas are supported by the DefSec and (as serving officers can't speak out) Lord Richards... still does not make it MoD HO policy (or even such initiative).
- adding cherries on top of the cake (the latter only to be published tomorrow) Con Coughlin chraracterises the NSC as an FO-run talking shop... and having read some of the outputs, it is hard not to agree

The report' is to posit' that in identifying and assessing threats (and then kicking preparations as for force mix, kit, training etc into gear) we are running about half a decade late. Not as a fluke, but systematically.

The answer? (The Telegraph of today, p.19)
"creating a small, elite and civilian-led office of a dozen or less staff to regularly update threats and as how to best feed such information into defence spending as for efficient and cost-effective choices" AKA framework budgets not tinkered with, but constant checks on priorities

That's called strategic management. Once upon a time (in the 70's) it emerged as a distinct topic in business management (the academic side of it, I hasten to add). Established disciplines (Finance and Marketing) both claimed ownership. We have the MoD HQ which definitely is following the Finance streak... steering by looking into the reverse mirror . AKA the unwieldy Conglomerates... most of which have long since disappeared (but they were not tax-payer funded).

The streak that won was spearheaded by names like Igor Ansoff, who (in simplistic terms) said:
- follow demand
- formalise "it" in a matrix format
- map your capabilities (& capacity) to each
- be open&honest about the shortcomings (three, or four, Commands, you see, with overlapping capabilities, and hence differing views, before "someone" aggregates them) and communicate them (internally)
- make sure you know who that someone is... and common sense says that it can't be the DefSec as one person (and watching the Thick of It, it can't be the PressSec either )