Has the worm turned?

[OldMedic]

Is this a genuine change of heart or political posturing?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9903911/Philip-Hammond-cut-welfare-not-troops.html

 

[Warwick Hunt]

I think Hammond has been forced to realise that the MoD is no longer in a position to accept any more cuts from his department. I don't think his job's under threat so I can't see any real need for posturing - not like this anyway. However he needs to be careful about where he demands cuts be made from in place of his. At the end of the day, the public don't really care about the MoD as they don't really get anything out of it. The welfare budget is very close to peoples hearts - can you really see the electorate voting for a party that stopped their benefits, etc, so a glorified gun, sailing and flying club can be financed, especially in the post-Herrick era?

Fair play to him to stand up and say "enough is enough". There are plenty of other S's of S in our very recent past who wouldn't have. It may not be much of a gesture and could be construed as too little, too late however at least he did it.

 

[FOMz]

I had the misfortune to meet Hammond at Brize a few years ago... The guy is a worm. I wouldnt trust him as far as I could throw him. I think this is all just bluff and posturing by him and also by the tories. There is a general election looming and they are starting to position themselves for that. He will do what Dave and Gideon want and you can bet your left nad, if they want more cuts from the MoD, he'll cut.

 

[firestorm]

Percentage wise, what is the scale of cuts the MOD has suffered to its budget? 8% seems to springs to mind.

 

[metimmee]

Percentage wise, what is the scale of cuts the MOD has suffered to its budget? 8% seems to springs to mind.

Without digging into it, the headline cut isn't the full story since trying to fill that, so called £38bn "black hole" in an attempt to be on a more "balanced footing" (buzzword bingo anyone?) the MoD has stressed itself more than it would have done if a headline cut had been applied to a balanced budget.

I think this is posturing and in league with what Cameron said a couple of weeks ago about some expeditionary ops being funded by aid.

God help us in a few years when Afghan and Iraq are a distant memory and govt spin turns against us like it did the fire service and like they are starting to do with the NHS and the Prison Service.

 

[firestorm]

^^^^Very true. No matter what regard you're held in, when the PR propaganda machine steps into gear, the mud sticks.^^^^

 

[Tin basher]

Wow so it really is Warfare not welfare thought that was an urban myth heard only in the crewroom. But it must be true now a politician has said it.::

 

[XVR RA RA RA]

You should believe it when you can see it.

Philip Hammond should be talking less and acting more, if he really means it. Don't tell us what you are going to do, tell us what you have done!

Speaking on a visit to an Arctic training camp for the Royal Marines before the by-election result, the Defence Secretary disclosed that he would strongly resist future cuts to the military, beyond moderate “efficiency savings”.

Printing false promises in the media just before election time are typical of our politicians. Note how it is worded, he hasn't said he will stop cuts just resist (how much resistance is he going to put up?) and what are moderate efficiency savings?

So to answer your question "Has the worm turned"? No, I don't think he has.