I agree, it's not one or the other...tomuk wrote: ↑06 Jun 2023, 03:33I think there needs to be a balance on the one hand I really can't support needlessly spaffing money away on wholly home grown bespoke equipment\programmes for the sake of 'UK jobs' etc but I'm also very much against spaffing money away on US made equipment FMS style where we get no benefit of the wages, taxes or profits generated by the purchase.mrclark303 wrote: ↑06 Jun 2023, 02:14Interesting take on it, now look a little further, the actual 'effect' on GDP from defence related UK procurement is massively less than the drain on the actual defence budget driven by that politically driven policy.mr.fred wrote: ↑05 Jun 2023, 18:15If the MoD budget is based on being a percentage of GDP and GDP goes up, what do you think will happen to the MoD budget?mrclark303 wrote: ↑05 Jun 2023, 15:32 I simply don't buy into the view of UK manufacturing draws expenditure back into UK coffers, (it might do), but those coffers are separate from the MOD budget, so your defence budget buys you less and less and the military continue to contract in an ever decreasing death spiral....
You actually support tail wagging the dog procurement?
There should be some offset whether that be directly as in the programme F35 style where BAE, Rolls and others are in the supply chain or on unrelated item ie we buy £1bn of armoured vehicles they buy £250m of missiles for example.
Take Poland for example, we could do a deal on an additional T31 and more Sky Saber Systems in exchange for 40 S70M's.
That way we get the needed helicopters ( the Army and RAF get the helicopter they want) and UK manufacturing gets a boost...
Anyone have issues with that as proposed deal?