|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
News Search
|
|
July 7, 2004, Scotsman DEFENCE SPENDING DEBATE: MOD FUNDS AN ARMY OF PEN-PUSHERS Gethin Chamberlain Defence Correspondent AS THE army braces itself for some of the most savage cuts in years, figures obtained by The Scotsman reveal that the Ministry of Defence now employs more civil servants than soldiers. With all army recruitment frozen until October, the army currently has no more than 102,000 soldiers on its books, while the MoD employs 102,600 civil servants. The MoD has been warned by the Treasury that it must find savings of up to GBP 2 billion from its budget. When Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, announces the cuts next week, he is expected to say that at least four army battalions will be disbanded, including at least one - and possibly two - from Scottish regiments. The axe is also expected to fall on thousands of naval and air force personnel. The Commons defence committee has already warned that the government's policy of reducing manpower, ships, aircraft and tanks because of an "obsession" with a new generation of hi-tech warfare systems is "potentially dangerous". Senior army officers have privately expressed grave concern, warning that cuts could lead to the disappearance of all of Scotland's historic regiments in a massive shake-up of the army which would leave Scotland with just one "super regiment". The MoD hopes to save GBP 70.4 million a year by cutting four army battalions - a fraction of the amount it needs to find in savings to meet the demands of the Treasury. But opponents say that even if the government accepts that savings must be made to balance the books, there are many other areas of expenditure that could be slashed without weakening Britain's armed forces. Yesterday, Keith Simpson, the shadow armed forces minister, said: "The public will find it incongruous, to say the least, if the government was to cut front -line troops rather than the growing army of civil servants." Oliver Letwin, the shadow chancellor, yesterday highlighted a number of areas in which he accused the government of wasting public money on administration. The figures show that the increase in the government's advertising budget alone since 1997 would cover the cost of running the threatened regiments for another year and a half. In 1997, the advertising budget was GBP 60 million; last year it stood at GBP 161 million. The government spent GBP 21.3 billion on Whitehall bureaucracy last year, a figure equivalent to GBP 850 for every household in the UK every year. According to Mr Letwin, Gordon Brown planned to spend GBP 17.2 billion on administering central government last year, but over-ran his budget by GBP 4 billion - twice the amount that he is now seeking to claw back from the armed forces. In both of the previous two years, spending on administration exceeded the budget by GBP 2.5 billion and in 2000-1 by GBP 1 billion. "It is not too far off the truth to say that the culture of big government has created exponential increases in overspending on administration," Mr Letwin said. He also pointed to the increasing cost of regulatory bodies, such as the Audit Commission. Its budget had risen from GBP 111 million in 1997 to GBP 217 million in 2003. Council inspections cost local government an estimated GBP 1 billion a year, he said - GBP 600 million in direct costs and another GBP 400 million in indirect costs. Mr Letwin also questioned the costs incurred by the Scottish Parliament, pointing out that it now cost GBP 100 million a year more to run Scotland's administration than it did in 1997, an amount which would cover the GBP 17.6 million annual running costs for one Scottish regiment for five and a half years. Last night, the MoD defended the number of civil servants it employed and promised that staffing levels among the bureaucrats would also be taken into consideration when decisions were taken on where the axe should fall. "We are looking at absolutely everything and we will be looking at civil service numbers," said a spokeswoman. "We don't employ civil servants for our own amusement. I know it always looks as if the front line suffers first, but we are hammering down civil service numbers." Meanwhile, army sources revealed that they were losing potential recruits because the MoD had imposed a freeze on recruitment to avoid having to make soldiers redundant after the cuts are announced. Approximately 2,350 soldiers will be affected by the loss of four battalions, with 550 expected to be placed in other infantry regiments and 1,800 transferred to the engineers and logistics. In the meantime, the MoD has stopped all recruitment until October, effectively cutting troop numbers by not replacing soldiers who are leaving the army. Regiments say that some potential recruits have not been prepared to wait, and one army source revealed that 1,000 fewer recruits were expected to pass through the training centre at Catterick this year compared with last. An MoD spokeswoman denied that the freeze had been instituted to provide a more palatable way of cutting army numbers. She said: "We are trying to achieve a balance." Politicians have promised to keep up the pressure on the government until the decision is announced next week.
|
|
||||
|
................................................................................................................. Copyright ©2004 Gethin Chamberlain. All rights reserved. |
|||||||
