Notes
The Statement on the Defence Estimates for 1984 is rather disappointing. No urgent concern about British security in- forms the document. In the resounding terms of Thatcherite cost consciousness it declares: 'We have to show the public that those who are responsible for the defence budget are aware of their responsbility to secure the greatest output of defence capability for a given input of manpower, uiPment and money'. Resolute words. dm can one seriously compare running a nationalised industry with deploying the na- tion's armed forces? Since even a na- tionalised industry has to compete for its share of the market, its return on invest- ment is easily measured. But how on earth is one to know what the 'greatest output of defence capability' is likely to be? It all depends on what we choose to regard as an adequate response to the threat to our security. The Government proposes to sPend £17 billion in the coming year on defence. Of this £7.8 billion or about 46 per cent of the total budget represents expen- diture on equipment. Nine years ago the Proportion was only 34 per cent. Undeter- rked by the escalating costs of the military hardware, the defence planners are in unanimous agreement on only one thing: th "ey must have the most up-to-date WeaPons systems. But the MoD, like any other government department, is obliged to work within strictly defined cash limits. The only remedy possible is to reduce man- inver. Servicemen are to be moved from the vital support areas into the front line: Royal Navy intends to cut the number of tnen employed on shore support by 40 per cent by 1993 — but it plans nevertheless an keep ; .n operation the eight destroyers frigates that John Nott wanted scrap- d in 1981; the RAF will increase its front coming decade but, in the absence of a Ingle additional recruited airman, it is go- Po to have to reduce its training and sup- units; in units; in return for a new wheeled ar- moured Personnel carrier (MCV 80) the Ar- will shift 4,000 men out of logistical isUPPort and into the front line. Exciting infoew equipment is, however, no substitute if well-trained soldiers, which we will need ;Is, some abundance for reinforcing the event of a Warsaw Pact onslaught. It is in
that Europe and not in the Caribbean wr–eceltirlyttev face the most serious threat to our
.• • there are no plans to initiate a havruitMent drive: it is cheaper, after all, to benefit belle,. People receiving unemployment
twit As the cost of equipment con-
shto soar ever greater cuts in manpower thorty.aYe to be . made. The trend is
ugnlY depressing.
Previous page
